{"schema":"abhortion.org/legislation.verbose/v1","id":"legality-us-mt","type":"legislation","level":"state","jurisdiction":"Montana","as_of_date":"2026-07-12","research_completed_date":"2026-07-12","headline":"Protected by constitution, viability limit","summary":"Abortion is constitutionally protected in Montana and legal until fetal viability, presumed at 24 weeks gestational age, with a life/health exception after viability.","machine_readable_summary":{"legal_classification":"protected_by_constitution","gestational_limit_weeks":24,"limit_measured_from":"fertilization","abortion_currently_available":"yes","ban_or_limit_enjoined":false,"mother_expressly_exempt":true,"mother_prosecutable_in_practice":false,"self_managed_abortion_criminalized":false,"abortion_charged_as_homicide":false,"fetal_homicide_law":true,"fetal_wrongful_death_action":true,"personhood_language_in_law":true,"personhood_contradiction":true,"medication_abortion_distinct_status":false,"mailing_pills_banned":false,"method_bans":["d_and_x"],"telehealth_prescribing_allowed":true,"physician_only_law":false,"provider_max_penalty":"Felony, fine up to $50,000, 5-10 years prison, permanent license revocation","helpers_criminally_exposed":false,"travel_assistance_criminalized":false,"civil_bounty_law":false,"shield_state":false,"waiting_period_hours":null,"state_scripted_counseling":false,"ultrasound_required":"none","in_person_visits_required":0,"parental_involvement":"notification_only","judicial_bypass_available":true,"spousal_consent_or_notice_on_books":false,"medicaid_coverage":"broader_than_hyde","private_insurance_restricted":true,"state_funding_posture":"funds_providers","rape_incest_exception":true,"exceptions_present":["life","physical_health","rape","incest","ectopic_miscarriage_carveout"],"major_pending_change":true},"links":{"html":"https://www.abhortion.org/legislation/mt.html","markdown":"https://www.abhortion.org/legislation/mt.md","summary_json":"https://www.abhortion.org/legislation/mt.json","full_json":"https://www.abhortion.org/legislation/mt-full.json","verbose_json":"https://www.abhortion.org/legislation/mt-verbose.json"},"overview":{"title":"Protected by constitution, viability limit","summary":"Abortion is constitutionally protected in Montana and legal until fetal viability, presumed at 24 weeks gestational age, with a life/health exception after viability.","description":"Abortion is legal in Montana. You have a state constitutional right to make decisions about your own pregnancy, including the right to an abortion. You can obtain an abortion up to fetal viability, which Montana law presumes to begin at 24 weeks of pregnancy measured from fertilization. After viability, an abortion can still be performed if needed to preserve your life or health. In November 2024, Montana voters passed a constitutional amendment (CI-128) that explicitly guarantees the right to abortion and protects those who help someone access abortion. This amendment took effect July 1, 2025. Montana does not require waiting periods, mandatory ultrasounds, or biased counseling. Advanced practice clinicians — not only physicians — can provide abortion care.","legal_analysis":"Montana's procreative-autonomy jurisprudence under Armstrong v. State, 1999 MT 261, interpreting Article II, Section 10 of the Montana Constitution (right of individual privacy), has long been among the most protective in the United States. CI-128, effective July 1, 2025, added Article II, Section 36, which expressly provides 'a right to make and carry out decisions about one's own pregnancy, including the right to abortion,' and prohibits government from denying or burdening pre-viability abortion access. The viability ban in § 50-20-109(b)(ii) remains operative but is now read against this constitutional backdrop. The 20-week pain-capable ban (§ 50-20-603), D&E ban (§ 50-20-1003), waiting-period/informed-consent provisions, ultrasound requirements, and telemedicine ban have all been permanently enjoined by Montana courts. An intact D&X ban (§ 50-20-401) remains in effect. Montana is an abortion-protective state, with its courts rigorously applying strict scrutiny to all abortion restrictions.","quote":"There is a right to make and carry out decisions about one's own pregnancy, including the right to abortion. The government may regulate the provision of abortion care after fetal viability provided that in no circumstance shall the government deny or burden access to an abortion that, in the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional, is medically indicated to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0000/article_0020/part_0010/section_0360/0000-0020-0010-0360.html","citation":"Mont. Const. art. II, § 36","pinpoint":"subsections (1) and (2)","quote":"There is a right to make and carry out decisions about one's own pregnancy, including the right to abortion. The government may regulate the provision of abortion care after fetal viability provided that in no circumstance shall the government deny or burden access to an abortion that, in the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional, is medically indicated to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient.","source_type":"constitution","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated on the Montana Legislature website"},{"name":"Center for Reproductive Rights (secondary); Justia","href":"https://reproductiverights.org/maps/abortion-laws-by-state/montana","citation":"Armstrong v. State, 1999 MT 261, 296 Mont. 361, 989 P.2d 364","quote":"The right of individual privacy is essential to the well-being of a free society and shall not be infringed without the showing of a compelling state interest.","source_type":"case","accessed":"Secondary source; Armstrong holding confirmed through multiple consistent descriptions across sources"},{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0090/0500-0200-0010-0090.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-109","pinpoint":"subsection (1)","quote":"an abortion may not be performed within the state of Montana: (a) except by a licensed physician or physician assistant; and (b) on an unborn child: (i) who is capable of feeling pain, except as provided in 50-20-603; or (ii) who is viable, unless necessary to preserve the life of the mother.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"},{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0040/0500-0200-0010-0040.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-104(6)","pinpoint":"subsection (6)","quote":"Viability means the ability of a fetus to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid. A determination of viability must be based on the best available science and survival data, with viability presumed at 24 weeks gestational age and any period of time after that.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]},"sections":{"definitions":{"title":"Intentional termination w/ medical carve-outs","summary":"Montana defines abortion as any instrument, medicine, drug, or substance used to intentionally terminate a known pregnancy, excluding removal of a dead fetus and acts to increase probability of live birth or preserve post-birth life/health.","description":"Under Montana law, 'abortion' means using any instrument, medicine, drug, or other substance or device to intentionally end a pregnancy when the woman is known to be pregnant. The definition specifically excludes actions taken to increase the chance of a live birth, to preserve the life or health of the child after live birth, or to remove a fetus that has already died. This means that miscarriage management (removing a fetus with no cardiac activity) is not classified as an abortion. The definition also does not explicitly exclude ectopic pregnancy removal in its text, but several enjoined statutes contain ectopic-pregnancy carve-outs, and as a practical matter, treatment of ectopic pregnancy is not treated as abortion in Montana.","legal_analysis":"The operative definition is at § 50-20-104(1): 'Abortion means the use or prescription of any instrument, medicine, drug, or other substance or device to intentionally terminate the pregnancy of a woman known to be pregnant, with an intention other than to increase the probability of a live birth, to preserve the life or health of the child after live birth, or to remove a dead fetus.' The phrase 'remove a dead fetus' effectively carves miscarriage management out of the definition, consistent with the understanding that absence of fetal cardiac activity means abortion restrictions do not apply. Ectopic pregnancy is not explicitly excluded by the statutory definition itself, but three (enjoined) statutes contain explicit ectopic-pregnancy carve-outs, indicating legislative intent not to reach ectopic treatment. IVF and embryos outside the womb are not addressed. The term 'known to be pregnant' introduces a mens rea component. Note that § 50-20-603 (pain-capable ban, enjoined) separately defines 'abortion' to exclude 'an act to remove an ectopic pregnancy.'","quote":"Abortion means the use or prescription of any instrument, medicine, drug, or other substance or device to intentionally terminate the pregnancy of a woman known to be pregnant, with an intention other than to increase the probability of a live birth, to preserve the life or health of the child after live birth, or to remove a dead fetus.","note":"Ectopic pregnancy is not expressly excluded by the definitional statute, but three enjoined laws contain such carve-outs. The practical enforcement position is that ectopic treatment is not treated as abortion.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0040/0500-0200-0010-0040.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-104(1)","pinpoint":"subsection (1)","quote":"Abortion means the use or prescription of any instrument, medicine, drug, or other substance or device to intentionally terminate the pregnancy of a woman known to be pregnant, with an intention other than to increase the probability of a live birth, to preserve the life or health of the child after live birth, or to remove a dead fetus.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]},"current_status":{"title":"Legal to viability; constitutional right","summary":"Abortion is constitutionally protected and legal in Montana until fetal viability, presumed at 24 weeks, with post-viability life and health exceptions.","description":"Abortion is legal in Montana. A person can obtain an abortion up to the point of fetal viability, which the law presumes to be 24 weeks gestational age or later. After viability, abortion is still permitted when necessary to preserve the pregnant person's life or health. Montana's state constitution, as amended by voters in November 2024 (effective July 1, 2025), explicitly guarantees the right to make and carry out decisions about one's own pregnancy, including the right to abortion. The Montana Supreme Court has repeatedly held that any restriction on abortion must survive strict scrutiny — the highest standard of judicial review — and has struck down numerous restrictions under this standard.","legal_analysis":"The operative statutory framework is the Montana Abortion Control Act, codified at Title 50, Chapter 20, MCA. The viability limit is set by § 50-20-109(1)(b)(ii), which prohibits abortion on a viable unborn child 'unless necessary to preserve the life of the mother.' Viability is defined at § 50-20-104(6) and presumed at 24 weeks gestational age. This viability ban is now constitutionally constrained by Article II, Section 36 (CI-128), which explicitly permits regulation only after fetal viability and prohibits the government from 'deny[ing] or burden[ing] access to an abortion that, in the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional, is medically indicated to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient.' Additionally, Article II, Section 10 (right of privacy) continues to protect procreative autonomy under Armstrong. The 20-week pain-capable ban (§ 50-20-603) was permanently enjoined by the District Court and that ruling was affirmed by the Montana Supreme Court in Knudsen, 2025 MT 120. The D&E ban (§ 50-20-1003) was permanently enjoined March 2025. Various procedural restrictions — 24-hour waiting period, biased counseling, ultrasound mandate, telemedicine ban — were struck down in Knudsen, 2025 MT 120.","quote":"Except as provided in 50-20-401, an abortion may not be performed within the state of Montana: (a) except by a licensed physician or physician assistant; and (b) on an unborn child: (i) who is capable of feeling pain, except as provided in 50-20-603; or (ii) who is viable, unless necessary to preserve the life of the mother.","note":"The pain-capable (20-week) subsection (b)(i) in § 50-20-109 cross-references § 50-20-603, which has been permanently enjoined, so it is unenforceable. The viability provision (b)(ii) remains operative. The physician-or-PA-only language in (a) is modified by Weems v. State, which held APRNs may also perform abortions.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0090/0500-0200-0010-0090.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-109","pinpoint":"subsection (1)","quote":"Except as provided in 50-20-401, an abortion may not be performed within the state of Montana: (a) except by a licensed physician or physician assistant; and (b) on an unborn child: (i) who is capable of feeling pain, except as provided in 50-20-603; or (ii) who is viable, unless necessary to preserve the life of the mother.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"},{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0000/article_0020/part_0010/section_0360/0000-0020-0010-0360.html","citation":"Mont. Const. art. II, § 36","pinpoint":"subsection (1)","quote":"There is a right to make and carry out decisions about one's own pregnancy, including the right to abortion.","source_type":"constitution","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"},{"name":"FindLaw / Montana Supreme Court","href":"https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/mt-supreme-court/117373154.html","citation":"Planned Parenthood of Mont. v. State by & through Knudsen, 2025 MT 120, 422 Mont. 241, 570 P.3d 51","quote":"Planned Parenthood of Montana v. State by and through Knudsen","source_type":"case","accessed":"Case citation verified; holding confirmed through multiple sources including WilmerHale and Planned Parenthood press releases"}]},"enforcement_status":{"title":"Core ban in effect; many restrictions enjoined","summary":"The viability ban is in force, but the 20-week pain ban, D&E ban, waiting period, counseling mandate, ultrasound requirement, telemedicine ban, and Medicaid funding restrictions are all permanently or preliminarily enjoined.","description":"Montana's viability limit (banning abortion after about 24 weeks unless the pregnant person's life or health is at risk) is in effect. But many laws passed by the legislature to restrict abortion have been blocked by Montana courts. Laws that are NOT in effect include: a ban on abortion at 20 weeks, a ban on D&E procedures (the most common second-trimester method), a 24-hour waiting period, state-mandated counseling scripts, an ultrasound requirement, a ban on getting abortion medication via telemedicine, limits on Medicaid coverage of abortion, and new clinic licensing requirements. The parental consent law for minors has also been struck down. A ban on intact D&E procedures (often called 'partial-birth abortion') does remain in effect. The voter-approved constitutional amendment CI-128 took effect July 1, 2025, adding an explicit constitutional right to abortion.","legal_analysis":"Montana's abortion jurisprudence is notable for the speed and thoroughness with which its courts have enjoined restrictions. Key currently-enjoined laws: (1) § 50-20-603 (20-week ban) — permanently enjoined by District Court, affirmed Knudsen 2025 MT 120; (2) § 50-20-1003 (D&E/dismemberment ban) — permanently enjoined March 2025; (3) §§ 50-20-704, 50-20-705 (telemedicine ban) — struck down Knudsen 2025 MT 120; (4) §§ 50-20-106, 50-20-707 (24-hour waiting period/informed consent for chemical abortion) — struck down Knudsen 2025 MT 120; (5) §§ 50-20-113, 50-20-707, 50-20-708, 50-20-105(4) (ultrasound, counseling mandates) — struck down Knudsen 2025 MT 120; (6) HB 544, HB 862, DPHHS Rule (Medicaid restrictions) — permanently enjoined March 2025; (7) §§ 50-20-501 through 50-20-511 (parental consent) — struck down Planned Parenthood v. State, 2024 MT 178, cert. denied 145 S. Ct. 2627 (2025); (8) HB 937 (abortion clinic licensure) — preliminarily enjoined, appeal pending. In effect: viability ban (§ 50-20-109(b)(ii)), partial-birth/D&X ban (§ 50-20-401), parental notification for under-16 (§§ 50-20-221 et seq. via LR-120), reporting requirements (§§ 50-20-110, 50-20-306), and facility record-keeping requirements.","quote":"The government shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against a person for aiding or assisting another person in exercising their right to make and carry out decisions about their pregnancy with their voluntary consent.","note":"The interplay between the vitality of § 50-20-109(b)(i) (pain-capable ban) and the permanent injunction of § 50-20-603 is nuanced; § 50-20-109(b)(i) expressly conditions on § 50-20-603, so the injunction of § 50-20-603 means the pain-capable prong in § 50-20-109 is unenforceable.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"FindLaw","href":"https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/mt-supreme-court/117373154.html","citation":"Planned Parenthood of Mont. v. State by & through Knudsen, 2025 MT 120, 422 Mont. 241, 570 P.3d 51","quote":"Planned Parenthood of Montana v. State by and through Knudsen, 2025 MT 120","source_type":"case","accessed":"Holding confirmed through multiple secondary sources — permanently enjoined 20-week ban, telemedicine ban, waiting period, counseling, ultrasound"},{"name":"Justia","href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/montana/supreme-court/2024/da-23-0272-0.html","citation":"Planned Parenthood of Mont. v. State, 2024 MT 178, 418 Mont. 457, 554 P.3d 153, cert. denied 145 S. Ct. 2627 (2025)","pinpoint":"¶1","quote":"We decide today that the classification created by the Legislature violates the fundamental right of a minor to control her body and destiny as guaranteed by Article II, Section 10, of the Montana Constitution","source_type":"case","accessed":"Text confirmed at Justia"},{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0000/article_0020/part_0010/section_0360/0000-0020-0010-0360.html","citation":"Mont. Const. art. II, § 36","pinpoint":"subsection (3)","quote":"The government shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against a person for aiding or assisting another person in exercising their right to make and carry out decisions about their pregnancy with their voluntary consent.","source_type":"constitution","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]},"exceptions":{"life":{"title":"Life exception at viability","type":"life","summary":"Post-viability abortion is permitted to preserve the pregnant woman's life, with written certification required.","description":"After viability, an abortion is allowed if it is necessary to preserve the pregnant person's life. The physician must certify in writing, setting forth in detail the facts relied upon for this judgment, before performing the abortion.","legal_analysis":"Under § 50-20-109(1)(b)(ii), post-viability abortion is prohibited 'unless necessary to preserve the life of the mother.' The certification requirement is set forth in § 50-20-109 and requires written certification 'setting forth in detail the facts relied upon in making [the physician's] judgment.' Article II, Section 36 of the Montana Constitution now additionally provides that the government shall not 'deny or burden access to an abortion that, in the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional, is medically indicated to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient' — language that supplements and expands upon the statutory exception.","quote":"an abortion may not be performed within the state of Montana: ... on an unborn child: ... who is viable, unless necessary to preserve the life of the mother.","note":"The constitutional language in Art. II, § 36 uses 'life or health,' which is broader than the statutory text's 'life of the mother.' Courts will likely read the constitutional provision as controlling where a conflict exists.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0090/0500-0200-0010-0090.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-109(1)(b)(ii)","pinpoint":"subsection (1)(b)","quote":"on an unborn child: (i) who is capable of feeling pain, except as provided in 50-20-603; or (ii) who is viable, unless necessary to preserve the life of the mother.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"},{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0000/article_0020/part_0010/section_0360/0000-0020-0010-0360.html","citation":"Mont. Const. art. II, § 36","pinpoint":"subsection (2)","quote":"in no circumstance shall the government deny or burden access to an abortion that, in the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional, is medically indicated to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient.","source_type":"constitution","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]},"physical_health":{"title":"Health exception at viability","type":"physical_health","summary":"Post-viability abortion is constitutionally protected to protect health, and the viability statute has been interpreted to include health.","description":"After viability, an abortion is permitted when medically indicated to protect the pregnant person's health. The constitutional amendment CI-128 explicitly says the government cannot deny or burden access to an abortion that a treating health care professional determines is needed to protect the patient's life or health. Under the viability statute, two licensed physicians (not including the one performing the abortion) must examine the patient and concur in writing that the abortion is necessary to preserve health.","legal_analysis":"The statutory text of § 50-20-109(1)(b)(ii) says 'unless necessary to preserve the life of the mother,' but the certification requirements at § 50-20-109 contemplate a health-based certification as well. The constitutional amendment in Article II, Section 36 explicitly uses 'life or health.' For health-based post-viability abortions, two licensed physicians (not including the performing physician) must examine the patient and concur in writing. This dual-physician requirement remains on the books but may be vulnerable to constitutional challenge under CI-128's framework.","quote":"in no circumstance shall the government deny or burden access to an abortion that, in the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional, is medically indicated to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient.","note":"The statutory text ('life of the mother') is narrower than the constitutional text ('life or health'). Because the constitution trumps, the health exception is operative.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0000/article_0020/part_0010/section_0360/0000-0020-0010-0360.html","citation":"Mont. Const. art. II, § 36","pinpoint":"subsection (2)","quote":"in no circumstance shall the government deny or burden access to an abortion that, in the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional, is medically indicated to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient.","source_type":"constitution","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]},"mental_health":{"title":"Not expressly excepted in statute","type":"mental_health","summary":"Montana's statutory viability exception says 'life of the mother,' but the constitutional amendment uses 'health' broadly, which could encompass mental health.","description":"The written statute says post-viability abortion is only allowed to preserve 'the life of the mother.' But the new constitutional amendment (CI-128) protects any abortion that is 'medically indicated to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient.' The word 'health' in this context could include mental health, but this has not yet been tested in court. In practice, under the constitutional standard, a physician's good-faith judgment that abortion is needed to protect mental health would likely be protected.","legal_analysis":"The viability ban at § 50-20-109(1)(b)(ii) uses 'preserve the life of the mother,' with no mental-health language. However, Article II, Section 36 broadly protects abortions 'medically indicated to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient.' The term 'health' could be interpreted to include mental health, especially given the broad procreative-autonomy jurisprudence in Montana. The enjoined 20-week ban (§ 50-20-603) explicitly excluded 'psychological or emotional conditions' from its exception, but this law is not in effect. How courts will read the constitutional 'health' language for mental health purposes post-viability is unsettled.","conflicting_authority":"The statutory text and constitutional text differ in scope. The constitutional 'health' language likely encompasses mental health, but no Montana court has yet ruled on this specific question.","note":"This is an unsettled area under CI-128. The broad constitutional language supports inclusion of mental health, but judicial interpretation is pending.","verification":"verified","confidence":"medium","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0000/article_0020/part_0010/section_0360/0000-0020-0010-0360.html","citation":"Mont. Const. art. II, § 36","pinpoint":"subsection (2)","quote":"in no circumstance shall the government deny or burden access to an abortion that, in the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional, is medically indicated to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient.","source_type":"constitution","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]},"rape":{"title":"Rape exception for insurance only","type":"rape","summary":"Montana's abortion ban does not require a rape or incest exception because abortion is already legal up to viability, but qualified health plans may cover abortion for rape or incest.","description":"Because abortion is broadly legal in Montana until viability, there is no need for a rape or incest exception to an abortion ban. The viability statute does not contain a rape/incest carve-out because pre-viability abortion is generally permitted regardless of the reason. Montana law does restrict qualified health plan (ACA marketplace) coverage — these plans cannot cover abortion except when the pregnancy results from rape or incest, or to save the life of the mother.","legal_analysis":"The viability framework of § 50-20-109 does not differentiate among reasons for seeking pre-viability abortion, making rape/incest-specific exceptions unnecessary for access purposes. However, § 33-22-116 prohibits qualified health plans on the exchange from covering abortion except when 'the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest' or 'the life of the mother is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury.'","quote":"The prohibition in this section does not apply to a plan that provides coverage for an abortion performed when: (a) the life of the mother is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself; or (b) the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest.","note":"The rape/incest language appears only in the insurance-coverage statute, not in the viability ban itself. Because abortion is broadly lawful pre-viability, no criminal-law rape exception is needed.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0330/chapter_0220/part_0010/section_0160/0330-0220-0010-0160.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 33-22-116(2)","pinpoint":"subsection (2)","quote":"The prohibition in this section does not apply to a plan that provides coverage for an abortion performed when: (a) the life of the mother is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself; or (b) the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]},"incest":{"title":"Incest exception for insurance only","type":"incest","summary":"Same as rape — the viability framework makes a criminal-law incest exception unnecessary, but qualified health plans may cover abortion for incest.","description":"The same analysis applies as for rape: incest is relevant only to insurance coverage, not to the legality of the procedure itself.","legal_analysis":"See discussion under rape exception. The statutory insurance restriction at § 33-22-116(2)(b) treats rape and incest identically.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0330/chapter_0220/part_0010/section_0160/0330-0220-0010-0160.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 33-22-116(2)(b)","pinpoint":"subsection (2)(b)","quote":"the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]},"fatal_fetal_anomaly":{"title":"No explicit fetal-anomaly exception","type":"fatal_fetal_anomaly","summary":"Montana's viability ban contains no explicit exception for fatal fetal anomalies, but because abortion is legal to viability, such pregnancies can be terminated before that point.","description":"Montana law does not have a specific exception for fatal fetal anomalies in the post-viability ban. However, because abortion is legal until viability (about 24 weeks), most pregnancies involving fatal fetal anomalies — which are typically diagnosed around the 20-week anatomy scan — can be terminated without needing an exception. For anomalies diagnosed later, the health exception under the constitutional amendment may provide legal protection.","legal_analysis":"No statutory exception for fatal fetal anomalies exists in § 50-20-109. However, because abortion is legal until viability (presumed at 24 weeks), most diagnoses of fatal fetal anomalies are made before viability and can be addressed without an exception. For anomalies diagnosed post-viability, Article II, Section 36's broad 'life or health' language could encompass physical health risks of continuing a pregnancy with a fatal fetal anomaly, though this has not been litigated.","note":"No explicit statutory fatal-anomaly exception exists; the constitutional health language may cover this.","verification":"not_applicable","confidence":"medium"},"ectopic_miscarriage_carveout":{"title":"Ectopic/miscarriage carved out","type":"ectopic_miscarriage_carveout","summary":"Miscarriage management (removal of a dead fetus) is expressly excluded from the definition of abortion. Ectopic pregnancy treatment is not treated as abortion in practice.","description":"Montana law does not consider miscarriage management to be an abortion. The legal definition of abortion specifically excludes procedures to 'remove a dead fetus.' This means that when a pregnancy has ended (no fetal cardiac activity), medical treatment to complete the miscarriage is not regulated by abortion laws. Ectopic pregnancy treatment — where the fertilized egg implants outside the uterus — is not explicitly excluded by the definition statute, but three other abortion-restriction statutes (all currently blocked by courts) contain language saying they do not apply to ectopic pregnancy removal. In practice, treating ectopic pregnancies is not considered abortion.","legal_analysis":"The definition at § 50-20-104(1) excludes acts with the intention 'to remove a dead fetus,' which encompasses miscarriage management when fetal cardiac activity is absent. Ectopic pregnancy: three enjoined laws contain explicit ectopic carve-outs (§§ 50-20-603, 50-20-1003, and the medication-abortion provisions). The viability ban itself does not explicitly exclude ectopic pregnancy, but given that an ectopic pregnancy can never result in a viable fetus, and given the consistent legislative pattern of treating ectopic removal separately, there is no realistic enforcement risk for treating ectopic pregnancy.","quote":"to remove a dead fetus","note":"The definitional carve-out for 'dead fetus' is clear for miscarriage. Ectopic pregnancy is less expressly addressed in the operative statute but is not treated as abortion in practice.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0040/0500-0200-0010-0040.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-104(1)","pinpoint":"subsection (1)","quote":"with an intention other than to increase the probability of a live birth, to preserve the life or health of the child after live birth, or to remove a dead fetus.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]}},"methods":{"procedural_surgical":{"title":"Legal; D&X ban in effect, D&E ban enjoined","summary":"Procedural abortion is legal until viability. Intact D&X ('partial-birth abortion') is banned with a life exception. The D&E ban is permanently enjoined.","description":"Surgical abortion methods — including aspiration (suction) abortion and dilation and evacuation (D&E) — are legal in Montana until viability. One type of surgical abortion is banned: intact dilation and extraction (intact D&X, sometimes called 'partial-birth abortion'), a rarely used method. The ban has an exception when the procedure is needed to save the pregnant person's life and no other method would work. A separate ban on standard D&E procedures (the most common second-trimester method) was passed in 2023 but has been permanently blocked by a court and is not in effect.","legal_analysis":"Procedural abortion is legal pre-viability under the Montana Constitution and § 50-20-109. Two method-specific bans exist: (1) The intact D&X/partial-birth ban at § 50-20-401 is in effect. It defines 'partial-birth abortion' as a procedure where 'the living fetus is removed intact from the uterus until only the head remains in the uterus,' 'all or a part of the intracranial contents of the fetus are evacuated,' and 'the head of the fetus is compressed.' Exception for life of the woman if 'no other medical procedure would save the life of the woman.' Penalty: felony, fine up to $50,000, 5-10 years prison, permanent license revocation. The woman is expressly exempted from liability (§ 50-20-401(2)(b)). (2) The D&E/'dismemberment' ban at § 50-20-1003 is permanently enjoined (March 2025, affirmed on appeal). That law had prohibited 'purposely or knowingly perform[ing], induc[ing], or attempt[ing] to perform or induce a dismemberment abortion procedure' except in a 'medical emergency.' The woman was expressly exempted from prosecution (§ 50-20-1003(3)).","quote":"Except as provided in this section, a person commits an offense if the person purposely, knowingly, or negligently causes a partial-birth abortion.","note":"The D&E ban at § 50-20-1003 is permanently enjoined. The partial-birth ban at § 50-20-401 is in effect but its application is limited to intact D&X, which is rarely performed.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/2024/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0040/section_0010/0500-0200-0040-0010.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-401","pinpoint":"subsection (1)","quote":"Except as provided in this section, a person commits an offense if the person purposely, knowingly, or negligently causes a partial-birth abortion.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2023 Montana Code Annotated on the MCA website"},{"name":"Justia","href":"https://law.justia.com/codes/montana/2024/title-50/chapter-20/part-10/section-50-20-1003","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-1003","pinpoint":"subsections (1) and (3)","quote":"Except in a medical emergency, a person may not purposely or knowingly perform, induce, or attempt to perform or induce a dismemberment abortion procedure. A woman on whom an abortion is performed, induced, or attempted in violation of this part may not be prosecuted for conspiracy to commit a violation of this part.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2024 Montana Code Annotated at Justia"}]},"medication":{"title":"Legal; no distinct restrictions","summary":"Medication abortion (mifepristone/misoprostol) is legal until viability. Telemedicine prescribing is permitted. The 24-hour waiting period and in-person dispensing requirements were struck down.","description":"Medication abortion — using pills (mifepristone and misoprostol) to end a pregnancy — is legal in Montana until viability. You can get these pills through an in-person visit or via telemedicine (video or phone appointment), because Montana's telemedicine ban for medication abortion was struck down by the Montana Supreme Court. There is no mandatory waiting period: the law that required a 24-hour wait between counseling and receiving the pills was also struck down. Pharmacists and other providers can dispense the medication. Montana does not have a law banning the mailing of abortion pills within the state. As a practical matter, medication abortion is widely available in Montana through clinics and telehealth services.","legal_analysis":"Medication abortion is governed by the same viability framework as procedural abortion. Several medication-abortion-specific restrictions were enacted in 2021 (HB 171) and 2023 and have been struck down: § 50-20-707 (24-hour waiting period/informed consent for 'chemical abortion') was permanently enjoined in Knudsen, 2025 MT 120; §§ 50-20-704 and 50-20-705 (in-person dispensing requirements and telemedicine ban for medication abortion) were struck down in Knudsen, 2025 MT 120. Montana has no separate statute criminalizing the mailing of abortion pills. There is no FDA-preemption litigation currently active in Montana courts on this point. Medication abortion may be prescribed by physicians, physician assistants, and APRNs consistent with Weems, 2023 MT 82. The permanent injunction of the March 2025 District Court order on the D&E/telemedicine case further reinforced that direct-to-patient telehealth medication abortion is permitted.","note":"All medication-abortion-specific restrictions (waiting period, telemedicine ban, in-person dispensing requirement) have been permanently enjoined. Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication.","verification":"semi_verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"FindLaw","href":"https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/mt-supreme-court/117373154.html","citation":"Planned Parenthood of Mont. v. State by & through Knudsen, 2025 MT 120, 422 Mont. 241, 570 P.3d 51","quote":"Planned Parenthood of Montana v. State by and through Knudsen, 2025 MT 120","source_type":"case","accessed":"Holding confirmed — permanently struck down telemedicine ban, 24-hour waiting period, and related medication-abortion restrictions"},{"name":"Montana Free Press / ACLU Montana","href":"https://montanafreepress.org/2023/05/12/montana-supreme-court-upholds-ruling-that-allows-some-nurses-to-provide-abortions","citation":"Weems v. State, 2023 MT 82, 412 Mont. 132, 529 P.3d 798","quote":"The Montana Supreme Court has upheld a lower court's decision that allowed advanced practice registered nurses to legally provide abortions","source_type":"case","accessed":"Secondary source confirming holding; also cited at reproductiverights.org"}]},"self_managed":{"title":"No criminal prohibition; woman exempt","summary":"Montana has no statute criminalizing self-managed abortion. The woman is expressly exempted from all abortion-related penalties. CI-128 constitutionally protects the right to make decisions about pregnancy.","description":"There is no law in Montana that makes it a crime for a pregnant person to end their own pregnancy. The Montana Abortion Control Act explicitly says that no penalty may be imposed against the woman upon whom an abortion is performed or attempted. The D&E ban (which is itself blocked) also said a woman could not be prosecuted for conspiracy. The new constitutional amendment says the government cannot penalize or prosecute a person for exercising their right to make decisions about their pregnancy. So self-managing an abortion — whether by obtaining pills online or by other means — does not expose the pregnant person to criminal liability under Montana law.","legal_analysis":"Montana has no stand-alone self-managed abortion (SMA) crime. The omnibus penalty provision § 50-20-112(4)(a) provides: 'A penalty may not be imposed against the woman upon whom the abortion is performed or attempted to be performed.' This exemption covers the entire chapter. The D&E ban at § 50-20-1003(3) (enjoined) similarly stated: 'A woman on whom an abortion is performed, induced, or attempted in violation of this part may not be prosecuted for conspiracy to commit a violation of this part.' The partial-birth ban at § 50-20-401(2)(b) exempts 'the woman upon whom a partial-birth abortion is performed.' The fetal homicide statute (§ 45-5-116(1)(c)) expressly bars prosecution of 'a woman with respect to her fetus.' The CI-128 constitutional amendment, Article II, Section 36(3), prohibits government from 'penaliz[ing], prosecut[ing], or otherwise tak[ing] adverse action against a person for aiding or assisting another person in exercising their right to make and carry out decisions about their pregnancy with their voluntary consent.' While this protects helpers, the pregnant person herself is protected under the substantive right in Section 36(1). The combination of these provisions means SMA is not criminalized in Montana.","quote":"A penalty may not be imposed against the woman upon whom the abortion is performed or attempted to be performed.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0120/0500-0200-0010-0120.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-112(4)(a)","pinpoint":"subsection (4)(a)","quote":"A penalty may not be imposed against the woman upon whom the abortion is performed or attempted to be performed.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"},{"name":"Justia","href":"https://law.justia.com/codes/montana/title-45/chapter-5/part-1/section-45-5-116","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 45-5-116(1)(c)","pinpoint":"subsection (1)(c)","quote":"A prosecution for a violation of 45-5-102 or 45-5-103 with regard to the death of a fetus of another may not be brought against: ... (c) a woman with respect to her fetus.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed at Justia (2025 Montana Code Annotated)"},{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0000/article_0020/part_0010/section_0360/0000-0020-0010-0360.html","citation":"Mont. Const. art. II, § 36","pinpoint":"subsection (1)","quote":"There is a right to make and carry out decisions about one's own pregnancy, including the right to abortion.","source_type":"constitution","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]}},"actors":{"who_may_perform":{"title":"Physicians, PAs, and APRNs","summary":"Licensed physicians, physician assistants, and advanced practice registered nurses (including nurse practitioners and nurse midwives) may perform abortions consistent with their scope of practice.","description":"In Montana, abortions can be performed by licensed physicians (M.D. or D.O.), physician assistants (PAs), and advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) — a category that includes nurse practitioners and certified nurse midwives. This is because the Montana Supreme Court ruled in 2023 that a law restricting abortion provision to physicians and physician assistants only was unconstitutional. The court held that restricting APRNs from providing abortion violated the state constitutional right to privacy by interfering with patients' access to care from qualified providers of their choosing.","legal_analysis":"The statute at § 50-20-109(1)(a) still reads 'except by a licensed physician or physician assistant.' However, in Weems v. State, 2023 MT 82, the Montana Supreme Court permanently enjoined § 50-20-109(1)(a) to the extent it limited abortion provision to only physicians and PAs. The court held that APRNs may provide abortion care consistent with their scope of practice. The court's reasoning was grounded in the right to privacy under Article II, Section 10, finding that restricting APRNs interfered with a person's right to access abortion care from a qualified provider of their choosing. There is no admitting-privileges requirement or hospital/ASC mandate in the operative law. The TRAP-style clinic licensure law (HB 937, 2023) requiring abortion clinics to obtain a special license is preliminarily enjoined.","quote":"except by a licensed physician or physician assistant","note":"The statutory text at § 50-20-109(1)(a) remains physician/PA-only on its face but has been modified by Weems. The Montana Code Annotated does not retroactively edit statutory text to reflect judicial holdings.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0090/0500-0200-0010-0090.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-109(1)(a)","pinpoint":"subsection (1)(a)","quote":"except by a licensed physician or physician assistant","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated; statutory text still says physician/PA only, but overridden by Weems"},{"name":"Montana Free Press","href":"https://montanafreepress.org/2023/05/12/montana-supreme-court-upholds-ruling-that-allows-some-nurses-to-provide-abortions","citation":"Weems v. State, 2023 MT 82, 412 Mont. 132, 529 P.3d 798","quote":"The Montana Supreme Court has upheld a lower court's decision that allowed advanced practice registered nurses to legally provide abortions","source_type":"case","accessed":"Secondary source confirming holding"}]},"criminal_civil_exposure":{"pregnant_woman":{"title":"Expressly exempt from all penalties","summary":"Montana law explicitly states that no penalty may be imposed against the woman upon whom an abortion is performed or attempted. The fetal homicide law also exempts the woman.","description":"Under Montana law, a pregnant person who has an abortion cannot be punished. The law clearly states: 'A penalty may not be imposed against the woman upon whom the abortion is performed or attempted to be performed.' This covers all penalties under the abortion chapter — criminal fines, imprisonment, everything. The fetal homicide law also says a woman cannot be prosecuted for the death of her own fetus. The new constitutional amendment says the government cannot penalize or prosecute a person for exercising their right to make decisions about their pregnancy. This means a pregnant person faces zero criminal exposure for having or attempting to have an abortion, whether performed by a provider or self-managed.","legal_analysis":"The woman's exemption is in § 50-20-112(4)(a): 'A penalty may not be imposed against the woman upon whom the abortion is performed or attempted to be performed.' This is an absolute bar on criminal or civil penalties against the pregnant woman under the Montana Abortion Control Act. The D&E ban (§ 50-20-1003(3), enjoined) and partial-birth ban (§ 50-20-401(2)(b)) each contain woman-specific exemptions. The fetal homicide statute (§ 45-5-116(1)(c)) bars prosecution of 'a woman with respect to her fetus.' The Article II, Section 36(1) constitutional right and Section 36(3) prohibition on penalizing individuals exercising pregnancy-related decisions further insulate the pregnant woman. There is no realistic scenario in which a pregnant woman faces criminal exposure for any abortion-related conduct in Montana.","quote":"A penalty may not be imposed against the woman upon whom the abortion is performed or attempted to be performed.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0120/0500-0200-0010-0120.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-112(4)(a)","pinpoint":"subsection (4)(a)","quote":"A penalty may not be imposed against the woman upon whom the abortion is performed or attempted to be performed.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"},{"name":"Justia","href":"https://law.justia.com/codes/montana/title-45/chapter-5/part-1/section-45-5-116","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 45-5-116(1)(c)","pinpoint":"subsection (1)(c)","quote":"A prosecution for a violation of 45-5-102 or 45-5-103 with regard to the death of a fetus of another may not be brought against: ... (c) a woman with respect to her fetus.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed at Justia (2025 Montana Code Annotated)"}]},"physician":{"title":"Felony exposure for prohibited conduct","summary":"Physicians face felony liability for violating the viability ban (up to 5 years prison, $1,000 fine) or the partial-birth ban (5-10 years prison, $50,000 fine, permanent license revocation).","description":"Physicians who perform abortions in violation of Montana's abortion laws face serious criminal penalties. For violating the viability ban (performing an abortion after viability without meeting the life/health exception), a physician faces a felony with up to 5 years in prison, a fine of up to $1,000, or both. For performing a banned intact D&X procedure, the penalty is a felony with 5 to 10 years in prison, a fine of up to $50,000, and permanent revocation of the physician's medical license. Failure to comply with documentation and reporting requirements is a misdemeanor punishable by up to 6 months in jail and a $500 fine, and can also trigger professional discipline including license suspension.","legal_analysis":"The penalty structure is tiered: (a) Violation of § 50-20-109 (viability ban, provider restrictions): a felony under § 50-20-109(2), sentenced per § 50-20-112(2) — fine up to $1,000, prison up to 5 years, or both. (b) Violation of § 50-20-401 (partial-birth/D&X ban): felony under § 50-20-401(4) — fine up to $50,000, prison 5-10 years, permanent license revocation, and the physician cannot seek license reinstatement under §§ 37-1-203 or 37-1-205. (c) Violation of reporting/documentation requirements (§ 50-20-110): misdemeanor — fine up to $500, jail up to 6 months (§ 50-20-112(3)), plus professional discipline including up to 1-year license suspension for medication-abortion reporting violations (§ 50-20-110(7)(b)). (d) The now-enjoined D&E ban carried felony exposure with a fine up to $50,000 and 5-10 years imprisonment. Because most restrictions beyond the viability ban have been struck down, the practical exposure for physicians performing pre-viability abortions is primarily limited to documentation/reporting compliance.","quote":"A person convicted of a felony other than deliberate, mitigated, or negligent homicide under this chapter is subject to a fine not to exceed $1,000, imprisonment in the state prison for a term not to exceed 5 years, or both.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0120/0500-0200-0010-0120.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-112(2)","pinpoint":"subsection (2)","quote":"A person convicted of a felony other than deliberate, mitigated, or negligent homicide under this chapter is subject to a fine not to exceed $1,000, imprisonment in the state prison for a term not to exceed 5 years, or both.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"},{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/2024/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0040/section_0010/0500-0200-0040-0010.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-401(4)","pinpoint":"subsection (4)","quote":"A person committing the offense provided for in subsection (1) is guilty of a felony and shall be punished by: (a) a fine of not more than $50,000; (b) imprisonment in a correctional facility for a term of not less than 5 years and not more than 10 years; or (c) both fine and imprisonment as provided in subsections (4)(a) and (4)(b); and (d) permanent revocation of the license of the physician performing the partial-birth abortion.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2023 Montana Code Annotated on the MCA website"}]},"prescriber_pharmacist":{"title":"Exposure for reporting violations","summary":"Non-physician prescribers (APRNs, PAs) are authorized to provide abortion care, including medication abortion. Pharmacists who fill prescriptions face no specific abortion-related liability. Documentation/reporting violations are misdemeanors.","description":"Nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and certified nurse midwives can legally prescribe and provide abortion medication and perform procedural abortions in Montana. Pharmacists who fill prescriptions for abortion medication face no specific abortion-related criminal exposure under Montana law. Health care providers must comply with documentation and reporting requirements: failure to report adverse side effects of medication abortion or failure to file required reports within 30 days is a misdemeanor (up to 6 months jail, $500 fine) and can result in professional discipline including up to a one-year license suspension.","legal_analysis":"APRNs and PAs are authorized to provide abortion care under Weems, 2023 MT 82. The reporting statute § 50-20-110 applies to all 'health care providers' who prescribe medication abortion — requiring them to keep records of adverse side effects and file reports. Violation of medication-abortion reporting requirements is both a misdemeanor (§§ 50-20-110(7)(a), 50-20-112(3)) and 'unprofessional conduct' subject to license sanctions including suspension for up to one year (§ 50-20-110(7)(b)). There is no Montana statute that imposes specific abortion-related liability on pharmacists. Filling an out-of-state prescription for abortion medication would generally be governed by Montana pharmacy law rather than abortion-specific law. The FDA's REMS program imposes federal requirements on dispensing mifepristone, which operate independently of state law.","quote":"Violation of this section is a misdemeanor and is punishable as provided in 46-18-212. Violation of the provisions of subsections (4) or (5)(b) by a health care provider is unprofessional conduct as defined in 37-1-308 and is subject to the sanctions provided for in 37-1-312(1)(b) through (1)(j), up to a maximum suspension of the provider's license for a period of 1 year.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0100/0500-0200-0010-0100.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-110(7)","pinpoint":"subsection (7)","quote":"Violation of this section is a misdemeanor and is punishable as provided in 46-18-212. Violation of the provisions of subsections (4) or (5)(b) by a health care provider is unprofessional conduct as defined in 37-1-308 and is subject to the sanctions provided for in 37-1-312(1)(b) through (1)(j), up to a maximum suspension of the provider's license for a period of 1 year.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]},"nurses_and_staff":{"title":"Limited exposure via reporting","summary":"Nurses and clinical staff providing abortion care within their scope under licensed supervision face no independent abortion-specific criminal exposure beyond documentation/reporting misdemeanors.","description":"Nurses, medical assistants, clinic counselors, and other clinical staff who help provide abortion care do not face independent criminal exposure under Montana's abortion laws. The laws target the provider performing the abortion, not supporting staff. Staff members could face misdemeanor liability for documentation and reporting violations. The clinic licensure law (currently blocked) would have imposed additional regulatory burdens on clinics and their staff.","legal_analysis":"The Montana Abortion Control Act targets 'person[s]' who perform abortions (§ 50-20-109) or violate specific provisions. There is no statute that separately criminalizes assisting clinical staff. General accomplice liability under Montana criminal law (§ 45-2-302, accountability for conduct of another) could theoretically apply, but the woman-exemption statute and the constitutional protection in Art. II, § 36(3) (protection for 'aiding or assisting another person') create strong defenses. Documentation/reporting violations (§ 50-20-110) apply to 'facilit[ies]' and 'health care provider[s],' and staff involved in record-keeping could be implicated. The clinic licensure law (HB 937, preliminarily enjoined) imposed structural requirements that would affect staff but is currently blocked.","note":"CI-128's helper-protection provision broadly shields anyone aiding or assisting in the exercise of pregnancy decision-making rights.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0000/article_0020/part_0010/section_0360/0000-0020-0010-0360.html","citation":"Mont. Const. art. II, § 36(3)","pinpoint":"subsection (3)","quote":"The government shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against a person for aiding or assisting another person in exercising their right to make and carry out decisions about their pregnancy with their voluntary consent.","source_type":"constitution","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]},"other_helpers":{"title":"Constitutionally protected from penalty","summary":"CI-128 expressly prohibits government from penalizing anyone who aids or assists another person in exercising their pregnancy decision-making rights. No bounty or civil-enforcement law exists.","description":"Friends, family members, employers, abortion funds, or anyone else who helps a pregnant person obtain an abortion — whether by driving them to a clinic, paying for the procedure, reimbursing travel, or providing emotional support — are protected from government penalty under the Montana Constitution. CI-128 says the government 'shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against a person for aiding or assisting another person in exercising their right to make and carry out decisions about their pregnancy with their voluntary consent.' Montana does not have a civil bounty law like Texas's SB 8 that would allow private citizens to sue helpers.","legal_analysis":"Article II, Section 36(3) of the Montana Constitution provides sweeping helper protection: 'The government shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against a person for aiding or assisting another person in exercising their right to make and carry out decisions about their pregnancy with their voluntary consent.' This provision, effective July 1, 2025, is the strongest helper-protection language of any state constitution. It protects all forms of assistance — financial, logistical, informational — as long as done with the pregnant person's voluntary consent. Montana has no SB 8-style civil bounty law. There is no criminal law targeting abortion funds, employers, or other third-party payers. No 'abortion trafficking' statute was enacted (HB 609, 2025, died in process).","quote":"The government shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against a person for aiding or assisting another person in exercising their right to make and carry out decisions about their pregnancy with their voluntary consent.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0000/article_0020/part_0010/section_0360/0000-0020-0010-0360.html","citation":"Mont. Const. art. II, § 36(3)","pinpoint":"subsection (3)","quote":"The government shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against a person for aiding or assisting another person in exercising their right to make and carry out decisions about their pregnancy with their voluntary consent.","source_type":"constitution","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]}}},"aiding_and_assisting":{"travel_assistance":{"title":"Protected by constitution; no trafficking law","summary":"Helping someone travel for an abortion is constitutionally protected under CI-128. A 2025 bill to criminalize 'abortion trafficking' died in the legislature. Residents may freely travel out of state.","description":"There is no law in Montana that criminalizes helping someone travel to obtain an abortion, whether within Montana or to another state. In fact, the Montana Constitution now explicitly protects anyone who 'aids or assists' another person in exercising their pregnancy decision-making rights. A bill introduced in the 2025 legislative session to create a crime of 'abortion trafficking' — which would have criminalized transporting a minor across state lines for an abortion — failed to pass. Montana residents are free to travel to any state for abortion care, and anyone helping them with travel is constitutionally protected.","legal_analysis":"HB 609 (2025), which would have created the criminal offense of 'abortion trafficking' — prohibiting purposely or knowingly transporting a pregnant minor across state lines for an abortion without parental consent — died in process (missed transmittal deadline). Even had it passed, it would face severe constitutional challenge under Article II, Section 36(3). Currently, no travel-restriction or trafficking law exists. The constitutional helper-protection clause in Art. II, § 36(3) provides affirmative protection. Montana does not have any local-ordinance-level travel restrictions of the kind seen in some Texas and other jurisdictions' counties.","note":"HB 609 died in the 2025 session. No 'abortion trafficking' law is on the books.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0000/article_0020/part_0010/section_0360/0000-0020-0010-0360.html","citation":"Mont. Const. art. II, § 36(3)","pinpoint":"subsection (3)","quote":"The government shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against a person for aiding or assisting another person in exercising their right to make and carry out decisions about their pregnancy with their voluntary consent.","source_type":"constitution","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"},{"name":"LegiScan","href":"https://legiscan.com/MT/bill/HB609/2025","citation":"HB 609, 2025 Montana Legislature","quote":"Status: Failed on May 20 2025 - 100% progression","source_type":"statute","accessed":"LegiScan bill tracking page"}]},"funding":{"title":"Protected; no funding restrictions in effect","summary":"Paying for an abortion or travel is constitutionally protected. Montana Medicaid covers abortion broadly. Laws restricting Medicaid funding and public funding of abortion have been permanently enjoined.","description":"Someone who pays for another person's abortion or abortion-related travel is constitutionally protected. Montana's Medicaid program covers abortion — not only in cases of rape, incest, or life endangerment (the federal Hyde Amendment minimum), but more broadly. In 2023, the legislature passed bills to restrict Medicaid abortion coverage, but those laws were permanently blocked by a state court in March 2025. Abortion funds, employers, and private individuals may pay for abortion care and related expenses without legal risk.","legal_analysis":"Medicaid funding: HB 544 and HB 862 (2023) and a DPHHS rule would have restricted Medicaid coverage of abortion — barring APCs from receiving Medicaid reimbursement for abortion, requiring prior authorization, and narrowing the definition of 'medically necessary.' In Planned Parenthood v. State, 2024 MT 228, the Montana Supreme Court upheld a preliminary injunction against these provisions, and in March 2025 the District Court permanently enjoined them. The state has appealed. This builds on prior litigation including Jeannette R. v. Ellery (1995), which established that the Montana Constitution requires broader abortion coverage than Hyde. Private funding: there is no statutory restriction on private payment for abortion or abortion-related expenses. The constitutional helper-protection clause in Art. II, § 36(3) provides additional protection for anyone funding abortion care.","note":"The state has appealed the permanent injunction on Medicaid restrictions. Re-check the status on appeal before publication.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Justia","href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/montana/supreme-court/2024/da-23-0287.html","citation":"Planned Parenthood v. State, 2024 MT 228, 418 Mont. 253, 557 P.3d 440","quote":"The case involves a challenge to two Montana laws, HB 544 and HB 862, and a rule adopted by the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services (DPHHS) regarding Medicaid funding for abortions.","source_type":"case","accessed":"Justia case summary confirms preliminary injunction upheld"},{"name":"Center for Reproductive Rights (secondary)","href":"https://reproductiverights.org/maps/abortion-laws-by-state/montana","citation":"Planned Parenthood v. Montana, No. ADV-2023-299, 2025 WL 2835750 (Mont. Dist. Ct. Mar. 11, 2025)","quote":"Planned Parenthood v. Mont., No. ADV-2023-299, 2025 WL 2835750 (Mont. Dist. Ct. Mar. 11, 2025) (permanently enjoining H.B. 544, H.B. 862, and Department of Public Health and Human Services Rule amendments)","source_type":"case","accessed":"Secondary source citation; confirming permanent injunction of Medicaid restrictions"}]},"mailing_pills":{"title":"No state prohibition","summary":"Montana has no law banning the mailing of abortion medication into or within the state. The telemedicine ban that restricted mailing has been struck down.","description":"There is no Montana law that makes it illegal to mail abortion pills (mifepristone and misoprostol) into the state or within the state. The law that required in-person dispensing of abortion medication was struck down by the Montana Supreme Court. Federal law governing mailing of prescription drugs applies, but Montana imposes no additional state-level mailing prohibition.","legal_analysis":"Montana has no stand-alone statute prohibiting the mailing of abortion-inducing drugs. The in-person dispensing requirement and telemedicine ban for medication abortion (§§ 50-20-704, 50-20-705) were permanently enjoined in Knudsen, 2025 MT 120. No mailing-specific statute exists in Title 50, Chapter 20 or elsewhere in the Montana Code. The federal Comstock Act's potential application to abortion medication mailing is a matter of federal interpretation and has not been applied by Montana authorities. Montana is not one of the states that has enacted a state-level Comstock-style mailing ban.","note":"Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication.","verification":"semi_verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"FindLaw","href":"https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/mt-supreme-court/117373154.html","citation":"Planned Parenthood of Mont. v. State by & through Knudsen, 2025 MT 120","quote":"Planned Parenthood of Montana v. State by and through Knudsen, 2025 MT 120","source_type":"case","accessed":"Confirming telemedicine ban and in-person dispensing requirements struck down"}]},"providing_information":{"title":"Protected First Amendment activity","summary":"Providing information about abortion, including websites and referrals, is constitutionally protected free speech. CI-128 adds state constitutional protection for aiding others in pregnancy decisions.","description":"Giving someone information about how to get an abortion — whether by sharing a website address, making a referral, or simply talking — is protected under the First Amendment. The Montana Constitution adds an extra layer of protection by explicitly prohibiting the government from penalizing anyone who aids or assists another person in exercising their pregnancy decision-making rights. There is no Montana law that criminalizes the provision of information about abortion.","legal_analysis":"Montana has no statute criminalizing the provision of abortion-related information. The state's courts have not addressed any First Amendment challenge to an abortion-information restriction because none has been enacted. The sweeping helper-protection language in Art. II, § 36(3) ('shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against a person for aiding or assisting another person') encompasses the provision of information. Additionally, the 1999 permanent injunction in Wicklund v. State struck down biased-counseling requirements under the privacy clause, which implicitly protects the free flow of medical information.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0000/article_0020/part_0010/section_0360/0000-0020-0010-0360.html","citation":"Mont. Const. art. II, § 36(3)","pinpoint":"subsection (3)","quote":"The government shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against a person for aiding or assisting another person in exercising their right to make and carry out decisions about their pregnancy with their voluntary consent.","source_type":"constitution","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]},"civil_bounty":{"title":"No civil bounty law","summary":"Montana has no SB 8-style law allowing private civil enforcement against abortion providers, helpers, or patients. No private right of action exists in the abortion context.","description":"Montana does not have a law that lets private citizens sue abortion providers, helpers, or patients. Unlike Texas's SB 8, which allows any private person to sue anyone who 'aids or abets' an abortion and collect at least $10,000, Montana has no comparable statute. The only civil liability in Montana abortion law is the provision that failure to obtain required consent is 'prima facie evidence in an appropriate civil action for a violation of a professional obligation' — this is a professional malpractice standard, not a bounty.","legal_analysis":"Montana has not enacted any private civil enforcement mechanism for abortion restrictions. The closest provision is § 50-20-510(2) (enjoined as part of the parental consent law): failure to obtain required consent 'is prima facie evidence in an appropriate civil action for a violation of a professional obligation.' This is a professional-negligence standard, not a citizen-enforcement bounty. There is no statutory damages minimum, no qui-tam-like mechanism, and no provision authorizing suits by persons not directly injured. Montana's legal culture and constitutional framework are hostile to SB 8-style bounty mechanisms.","verification":"not_applicable","confidence":"high"}},"procedural_requirements":{"waiting_period":{"title":"No waiting period","summary":"Montana's 24-hour waiting period between informed consent and abortion was permanently struck down by the Montana Supreme Court in 2025.","description":"Montana does not require you to wait any specific amount of time between your counseling appointment and your abortion procedure. The law that required a 24-hour waiting period — and a separate 24-hour waiting period for medication abortion — were both struck down by the Montana Supreme Court in June 2025. You can receive counseling and have your abortion on the same day.","legal_analysis":"The 24-hour waiting period in § 50-20-106 (informed consent, 24 hours before abortion) and § 50-20-707(2) (informed consent for 'chemical abortion,' 24 hours before dispensing medication) were both permanently enjoined by the Montana Supreme Court in Knudsen, 2025 MT 120. The District Court had originally permanently enjoined these provisions in 2024, and the Supreme Court affirmed. The provisions were held to violate the right to privacy under Article II, Section 10, as they failed strict scrutiny — the state did not demonstrate they addressed a 'medically acknowledged, bona fide health risk.' No waiting period is currently enforceable.","note":"Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication.","verification":"semi_verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"FindLaw","href":"https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/mt-supreme-court/117373154.html","citation":"Planned Parenthood of Mont. v. State by & through Knudsen, 2025 MT 120","quote":"Do restrictions on medication abortions and requirements that providers give patients certain information violate Montana's constitutional guarantees of individual privacy and free speech?","source_type":"case","accessed":"Case summary confirming waiting period struck down"}]},"mandatory_counseling":{"title":"No scripted counseling in effect","summary":"Montana's state-scripted informed consent and biased counseling requirements were permanently struck down by the Montana Supreme Court in 2025.","description":"Montana does not require health care providers to read a government-written script or provide state-mandated materials to patients seeking abortion. The laws that required doctors to give patients specific state-produced materials — including information that some medical groups consider biased or inaccurate — were struck down by the Montana Supreme Court. Providers must still obtain informed consent under general medical standards, but the government does not dictate what they must say.","legal_analysis":"The mandatory informed consent provisions at §§ 50-20-106, 50-20-105(4), and the counseling requirements at §§ 50-20-304, 50-20-707, and 50-20-708 were permanently enjoined in Knudsen, 2025 MT 120. The earlier 1995 counseling and waiting-period provisions (§§ 50-20-104(5), 50-20-106) had also been permanently enjoined in Planned Parenthood of Missoula v. State (1999). General medical informed consent obligations under Montana law (not abortion-specific) still apply, but there is no state-scripted abortion counseling requirement in force.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Center for Reproductive Rights (secondary)","href":"https://reproductiverights.org/maps/abortion-laws-by-state/montana","citation":"Planned Parenthood of Missoula v. State, No. BDV-95-722, 1999 Mont. Dist. LEXIS 1117 (Mont. Dist. Ct. Mar. 12, 1999)","quote":"Previous waiting period and biased counseling requirements are permanently enjoined.","source_type":"case","accessed":"Secondary source confirming permanent injunction"}]},"ultrasound_requirement":{"title":"No ultrasound requirement","summary":"Montana's requirement that providers offer patients the opportunity to view an ultrasound and listen to a fetal heartbeat was struck down by the Montana Supreme Court.","description":"There is no legal requirement in Montana that you have an ultrasound before getting an abortion, or that you view an ultrasound image, or that you listen to a fetal heartbeat. A law that required providers to offer patients the opportunity to view an ultrasound and hear a fetal heartbeat was found unconstitutional and permanently blocked by the Montana Supreme Court. The viability determination statute requires an ultrasound for the provider's clinical assessment of gestational age, but this is a medical determination, not a requirement to show or describe the image to the patient.","legal_analysis":"The ultrasound viewing and fetal-heartbeat-listening requirement at § 50-20-113 was permanently enjoined in Knudsen, 2025 MT 120. Separately, § 50-20-104(6)(b)(i) requires an ultrasound for the viability determination to be included in the written record, but this is a clinical assessment tool for the provider, not a requirement to display or describe the ultrasound to the patient. The 2023 law requiring a pre-abortion ultrasound (which effectively banned telemedicine) was permanently enjoined in March 2025. No mandatory ultrasound display, description, or offer requirement is in force.","note":"Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication.","verification":"semi_verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"FindLaw","href":"https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/mt-supreme-court/117373154.html","citation":"Planned Parenthood of Mont. v. State by & through Knudsen, 2025 MT 120","quote":"Does a law mandating that providers offer patients the opportunity to view an ultrasound and listen to a fetal heart tone violate Montana's constitutional guarantee of individual privacy?","source_type":"case","accessed":"Case summary confirming ultrasound/auscultation requirement struck down"}]},"in_person_visits":{"title":"No mandatory in-person visits","summary":"Montana requires zero in-person visits for abortion. The telemedicine ban and in-person dispensing requirements were struck down; no waiting period or ultrasound requirement remains.","description":"You do not need to make any in-person visits to obtain an abortion in Montana — particularly for medication abortion, which can be prescribed via telemedicine and mailed or picked up at a pharmacy. The laws that would have required in-person visits (telemedicine ban, 24-hour waiting period, ultrasound requirement) have all been struck down by Montana courts.","legal_analysis":"The telemedicine ban and in-person dispensing requirements (§§ 50-20-704, 50-20-705) were permanently enjoined in Knudsen, 2025 MT 120. The 24-hour waiting period and biased counseling requirements that would have forced two in-person visits were also struck down. The ultrasound requirement was struck down. The net effect is zero legally compelled in-person visits. A patient can consult a provider via telehealth, receive a prescription, and obtain medication without ever entering a clinic.","note":"Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication.","verification":"semi_verified","confidence":"high"}},"minors":{"parental_involvement":{"title":"Notice for under-16; consent law struck down","summary":"Minors under 16 must have a parent or guardian notified 48 hours before an abortion, with judicial bypass available. The parental consent law was struck down as unconstitutional.","description":"If you are under 16 and not emancipated, Montana law requires that one of your parents or legal guardians be notified at least 48 hours before your abortion. The notice can be given by the provider in writing or by phone. There are exceptions: if a medical emergency means there isn't enough time, if the parent waives the requirement in writing, or if you obtain permission from a judge through a process called judicial bypass. If you are 16 or 17, no parental involvement is required. A separate law that would have required actual notarized parental consent for minors under 18 was struck down by the Montana Supreme Court in 2024 and the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the state's appeal.","legal_analysis":"The Parental Notification of Abortion Act of 2011 (LR-120), codified at §§ 50-20-221 through 50-20-225, 50-20-228, 50-20-229, 50-20-232, and 50-20-235, remains in effect. It requires 48-hour notice to one parent or legal guardian before an abortion on a minor under 16 who is not emancipated. Notice may be in writing or by phone; if not possible, by certified mail. Exceptions: medical emergency (defined at § 50-20-222: condition that 'so complicates the medical condition of a pregnant woman as to necessitate the immediate abortion... to avert the woman's death or... serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function'), parental waiver in writing, or judicial bypass. Violation is a misdemeanor (§ 50-20-509) with fines and jail up to 6 months, and is prima facie evidence of professional violation. The Parental Consent for Abortion Act of 2013 (§§ 50-20-501 through 50-20-511) was struck down in Planned Parenthood v. State, 2024 MT 178, and certiorari was denied by the U.S. Supreme Court, 145 S. Ct. 2627 (2025).","quote":"The Parental Notification of Abortion Act, which was approved by more than 70% of voters via LR-120 in 2012, makes it illegal to coerce a minor into having an abortion and requires that a medical professional performing an abortion for a pregnant minor must notify at least one parent or legal guardian of the pregnant minor at least 48 hours in advance.","conflicting_authority":"The Attorney General takes the position that the parental-notice law is in effect and will be enforced, while the notice statute is facing a separate constitutional challenge in district court that has not yet been resolved. Several judges have delayed ruling, and the state argues the law remains operative.","note":"The Parental Notice Act is subject to ongoing constitutional challenge in state district court. The Attorney General's advisory confirms the state considers it in effect. Re-check the status of the district court challenge before publication.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Department of Justice","href":"https://dojmt.gov/montana-departments-of-justice-public-health-and-human-services-issue-advisory-clarifying-state-of-parental-notification-of-abortion-act","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. §§ 50-20-221 through 50-20-235","quote":"The Parental Notification of Abortion Act, which was approved by more than 70% of voters via LR-120 in 2012, makes it illegal to coerce a minor into having an abortion and requires that a medical professional performing an abortion for a pregnant minor must notify at least one parent or legal guardian of the pregnant minor at least 48 hours in advance.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Montana DOJ advisory, January 2022"},{"name":"Justia","href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/montana/supreme-court/2024/da-23-0272-0.html","citation":"Planned Parenthood v. State, 2024 MT 178, cert. denied, 145 S. Ct. 2627 (2025)","pinpoint":"¶1","quote":"the Consent Act violates the Constitution of the State of Montana","source_type":"case","accessed":"Text confirmed at Justia"}]},"judicial_bypass":{"title":"Available for parental notice","summary":"A minor under 16 may petition a youth court for a waiver of the parental notice requirement. The minor must demonstrate maturity or that notice is not in her best interests.","description":"If you are under 16 and cannot or do not want to involve a parent, you can ask a judge for permission to get an abortion without notifying your parents. This is called judicial bypass. A judge in youth court will appoint a lawyer for you at no cost. You'll need to show either that you are mature enough to make the decision on your own, or that telling a parent would not be in your best interests — for example, if there is abuse. The process is confidential, and if the judge says no, you can appeal to the Montana Supreme Court.","legal_analysis":"The judicial bypass provision is located at § 50-20-225 (Notice Act). An unemancipated minor under 16 may petition the youth court. The court must appoint counsel and may appoint a guardian ad litem. The minor must demonstrate either competence to make the abortion decision or that parental notice is not in her best interests. The proceedings are confidential and must be expedited. Adverse rulings are appealable directly to the Montana Supreme Court. The bypass standard under the Notice Act is similar to but distinct from the bypass provision that existed under the now-struck-down Consent Act (§ 50-20-509), which required the minor to show competence AND evidence of abuse or that consent was not in the minor's best interests.","note":"The specific text of § 50-20-225 as currently codified should be independently verified at the Montana Legislature website, as the state's codification of the Notice Act has been complicated by the repeal-and-revival history.","verification":"verified","confidence":"medium","citations":[{"name":"Montana DOJ Advisory (secondary)","href":"https://dojmt.gov/montana-departments-of-justice-public-health-and-human-services-issue-advisory-clarifying-state-of-parental-notification-of-abortion-act","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-225","quote":"The voter-approved LR-120, therefore, remains in effect and good law. Its provisions are located in MCA, §§ 50-20-221 to -225, -228 to -229, -232, and -235 (2011).","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Montana DOJ confirms operative sections"}]}},"paternal_spousal_rights":{"consent_or_notice_laws":{"title":"No spousal or paternal consent/notice","summary":"Montana has no statute requiring spousal or paternal consent or notice for abortion. The repealed § 50-20-107 formerly addressed spousal consent but no longer exists.","description":"Montana does not require a married person to get their spouse's permission or even notify their spouse before having an abortion. There is no law requiring the consent or notification of the father of the pregnancy. A previous spousal consent law was repealed and no replacement was enacted. The only parental-involvement law that exists applies to minors under 16, and even then, only one parent needs to be notified — not both.","legal_analysis":"Montana Code § 50-20-107, which addressed spousal or paternal consent/affirmative consent, has been repealed. The current Montana Code Annotated lists § 50-20-107 as 'Repealed.' No other statute in Title 50, Chapter 20 or elsewhere in the MCA requires spousal or paternal consent, notice, or consultation for abortion. Even if such a law existed, it would be unconstitutional under Planned Parenthood v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52 (1976) (striking spousal consent) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992) (striking spousal notification), with Dobbs not reopening the question in this jurisdiction because Montana's independent state constitutional protections provide stronger privacy rights than the federal constitution.","note":"Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication.","verification":"semi_verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature (via Justia)","href":"https://law.justia.com/codes/montana/title-50/chapter-20/part-1","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-107 (Repealed)","quote":"50-20-107. Repealed","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Justia listing confirms repeal"}]},"enforceability":{"title":"No spousal law to enforce","summary":"Because Montana has no spousal or paternal consent/notice statute on the books, enforceability analysis is moot. Any such law would violate the Montana Constitution.","description":"Since Montana has no law requiring a spouse's or father's consent or notice, there is nothing to enforce. Even if the legislature tried to pass such a law, it would likely be struck down under Montana's strong state constitutional right to privacy and the new explicit abortion rights amendment.","legal_analysis":"Danforth and Casey struck spousal consent and notice under the federal Constitution. Dobbs removed the federal constitutional floor, but Montana's state constitutional protection of procreative autonomy under Armstrong and Article II, Sections 10 and 36 provides an independent and stronger state-law basis for invalidating any spousal/paternal consent or notice requirement. No such law currently exists.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Center for Reproductive Rights (secondary)","href":"https://reproductiverights.org/maps/abortion-laws-by-state/montana","citation":"Armstrong v. State, 1999 MT 261, 296 Mont. 361, 989 P.2d 364","quote":"The Supreme Court of Montana describes this provision as 'one of the most stringent protections of its citizens' right to privacy in the United States—exceeding even that provided by the federal constitution.'","source_type":"case","accessed":"Secondary source quoting Armstrong"}]},"other_paternal_rights":{"title":"Wrongful death standing; no veto","summary":"A father may bring a wrongful-death action for a stillborn fetus under Montana law. No right to veto or enjoin an abortion exists.","description":"In Montana, the father of a fetus does not have the right to prevent an abortion. The decision to have an abortion belongs to the pregnant person. However, if a fetus is killed through someone else's wrongful act (for example, a car accident caused by a negligent driver), the father can potentially bring a wrongful death lawsuit. The Montana Supreme Court has ruled that a claim for wrongful death can extend to a stillborn fetus in certain circumstances. There is no putative-father registry relevant to abortion decisions in Montana.","legal_analysis":"In Strzelczyk v. Jett, 1994, the Montana Supreme Court held that a wrongful-death claim could lie for a stillborn fetus under the circumstances of that case, interpreting § 27-1-513 (wrongful death statute) and § 41-1-103 (providing that 'a child conceived but not yet born is to be deemed an existing person, so far as may be necessary for its interests in the event of its subsequent birth'). The Court specifically noted in concurrence that 'this is not an abortion case or a case related in any way to a woman's constitutional right to privacy.' No Montana court has recognized a paternal right to enjoin an abortion. The Montana Supreme Court's decision in Planned Parenthood v. State, 2024 MT 178, recognized that the state's interest in 'fostering family unity and preserving the family as a viable social unit' did not justify the parental consent law, suggesting that paternal or family interests do not override the pregnant person's constitutional privacy rights.","quote":"A child conceived but not yet born is to be deemed an existing person, so far as may be necessary for its interests in the event of its subsequent birth.","note":"Strzelczyk was decided in 1994. The precise scope of its holding — particularly whether viability is required — has not been revisited. The court's analysis relied on the facts of a full-term stillbirth.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Justia (via Strzelczyk opinion)","href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/montana/supreme-court/1994/59ddbbe3-5ef3-47e7-a857-dd37305e4248.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 41-1-103","quote":"A child conceived but not yet born is to be deemed an existing person, so far as may be necessary for its interests in the event of its subsequent birth.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text quoted within Strzelczyk v. Jett opinion"},{"name":"Justia","href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/montana/supreme-court/1994/59ddbbe3-5ef3-47e7-a857-dd37305e4248.html","citation":"Strzelczyk v. Jett, No. 93-173 (Mont. 1994)","quote":"Under the facts of this case, the State of Montana recognizes a claim of wrongful death for a stillborn fetus.","source_type":"case","accessed":"Text confirmed at Justia"}]}},"fetal_personhood":{"fetal_homicide_law":{"title":"Fetal homicide w/ abortion & woman carve-outs","summary":"Montana's deliberate homicide statute includes causing the death of a fetus of another. The woman and anyone performing a consented abortion are expressly exempt from prosecution.","description":"Montana law makes it a crime to cause the death of another person's fetus. Specifically, a person can be charged with deliberate homicide if they 'purposely or knowingly cause the death of a fetus of another with knowledge that the woman is pregnant.' This applies to third parties who attack a pregnant person and kill the fetus — not to the pregnant person herself or to abortion providers. The law explicitly says that the pregnant woman cannot be prosecuted for the death of her own fetus, and that someone who performs an abortion with proper consent also cannot be prosecuted. This creates an interesting situation where a fetus is treated as a homicide victim under criminal law, but those protections are carved out for the contexts of abortion and the pregnant person's own actions.","legal_analysis":"Section 45-5-102(1)(c) provides: 'A person commits the offense of deliberate homicide if: ... the person purposely or knowingly causes the death of a fetus of another with knowledge that the woman is pregnant.' 'Fetus' is defined at § 45-5-116(3) as 'an organism of the species Homo sapiens from 8 weeks of development until complete expulsion or extraction from a woman's body.' The penalty for deliberate homicide is death, life imprisonment, or 10-100 years (§ 45-5-102(2)). Section 45-5-116(1) exempts: '(a) a person for conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf has been obtained or for which the consent is implied by law; (b) a person for any medical treatment of the pregnant woman or her fetus; or (c) a woman with respect to her fetus.' This triple exemption carves out all abortion-related and medical-treatment conduct. The fetal homicide law thus functions as a third-party violence enhancement (e.g., for someone who assaults a pregnant woman and kills the fetus), not as an abortion restriction.","quote":"A prosecution for a violation of 45-5-102 or 45-5-103 with regard to the death of a fetus of another may not be brought against: (a) a person for conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf has been obtained or for which the consent is implied by law; (b) a person for any medical treatment of the pregnant woman or her fetus; or (c) a woman with respect to her fetus.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Justia","href":"https://law.justia.com/codes/montana/title-45/chapter-5/part-1/section-45-5-116","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 45-5-116(1)","pinpoint":"subsection (1)","quote":"A prosecution for a violation of 45-5-102 or 45-5-103 with regard to the death of a fetus of another may not be brought against: (a) a person for conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf has been obtained or for which the consent is implied by law; (b) a person for any medical treatment of the pregnant woman or her fetus; or (c) a woman with respect to her fetus.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed at Justia (2025 Montana Code Annotated)"},{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0450/chapter_0050/part_0010/section_0020/0450-0050-0010-0020.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 45-5-102(1)(c)","pinpoint":"subsection (1)(c)","quote":"the person purposely or knowingly causes the death of a fetus of another with knowledge that the woman is pregnant.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]},"wrongful_death":{"title":"Recognized for stillborn fetus","summary":"The Montana Supreme Court in Strzelczyk v. Jett (1994) recognized that a wrongful-death claim may lie for a stillborn fetus, applying § 27-1-513 and § 41-1-103 on a fact-specific basis.","description":"Under Montana law, a parent may be able to bring a wrongful death lawsuit for the loss of a stillborn fetus if the death was caused by someone else's negligence or wrongful act. The Montana Supreme Court decided this in a 1994 case called Strzelczyk v. Jett, where it found that a full-term stillbirth could support a wrongful death claim. The court's decision was based on a specific Montana law that says 'a child conceived but not yet born is to be deemed an existing person, so far as may be necessary for its interests in the event of its subsequent birth.' The court explicitly said this was not an abortion case — it was about negligent medical care resulting in a stillbirth.","legal_analysis":"In Strzelczyk v. Jett, the Montana Supreme Court interpreted the 1987 amendments to Montana's wrongful death statutes (§§ 27-1-512 and 27-1-513, MCA) to permit a wrongful death claim for a stillborn fetus. The Court relied on § 41-1-103, which provides that 'a child conceived but not yet born is to be deemed an existing person, so far as may be necessary for its interests in the event of its subsequent birth.' The Court held that 'birth' includes stillbirth, as the legislature did not specify 'live birth' as it did in § 50-15-101(1) ('Fetal death means a birth after 20 weeks of gestation... that is not a live birth'). The Court emphasized the fact-specific nature of the inquiry: 'each case must be considered carefully in order to determine if the circumstances present make it \"necessary\" for the fetus to be determined a person in order to protect some interest.' Justice Gray specially concurred to emphasize: 'This is not an abortion case or a case related in any way to a woman's constitutional right to privacy and to an abortion.'","quote":"A child conceived but not yet born is to be deemed an existing person, so far as may be necessary for its interests in the event of its subsequent birth.","note":"Strzelczyk is a 1994 decision; its application to pre-viability stillbirths is unclear — the case involved a full-term stillbirth. The court emphasized fact-specificity.","verification":"verified","confidence":"medium","citations":[{"name":"Justia (via Strzelczyk opinion)","href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/montana/supreme-court/1994/59ddbbe3-5ef3-47e7-a857-dd37305e4248.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 41-1-103","quote":"A child conceived but not yet born is to be deemed an existing person, so far as may be necessary for its interests in the event of its subsequent birth.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text quoted within Strzelczyk opinion"},{"name":"Justia","href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/montana/supreme-court/1994/59ddbbe3-5ef3-47e7-a857-dd37305e4248.html","citation":"Strzelczyk v. Jett, No. 93-173 (Mont. 1994)","quote":"Under the facts of this case, the State of Montana recognizes a claim of wrongful death for a stillborn fetus.","source_type":"case","accessed":"Text confirmed at Justia"}]},"personhood_definition":{"title":"Statutory personhood language exists","summary":"Montana has several statutory provisions that define unborn children as persons for particular purposes, including fetal homicide (§ 45-5-102(c)), the property/inheritance statute (§ 41-1-103), and abortion-chapter references to 'unborn child.'","description":"Montana law contains several provisions that treat an unborn child as a person in certain contexts. The deliberate homicide law counts a fetus as a potential homicide victim from 8 weeks of development. The property and inheritance law says an unborn child is 'deemed an existing person' when it is in the child's interests following birth. The abortion chapter itself refers to an 'unborn child' throughout. However, none of these personhood provisions override the constitutional right to abortion. Each personhood statute contains express carve-outs for abortion and for the pregnant woman.","legal_analysis":"Personhood language appears in multiple Montana statutes: (1) § 45-5-102(1)(c) — deliberate homicide of a fetus; (2) § 45-5-116(3) — defining 'fetus' as 'an organism of the species Homo sapiens from 8 weeks of development until complete expulsion or extraction from a woman's body'; (3) § 41-1-103 — unborn child deemed existing person for property/inheritance interests upon subsequent birth; (4) § 50-20-109 — uses 'unborn child' throughout (viability ban); (5) § 50-20-102 — legislative findings refer to 'unborn child' and state that 'the state has a duty to protect innocent life.' The 2023 legislature enacted § 1-2-117, which sought to redefine the right to privacy to exclude abortion. However, CI-128's passage in November 2024 (effective July 1, 2025) added Article II, Section 36, which explicitly supersedes any such legislative redefinition by providing an express constitutional right to abortion. The Montana Supreme Court in Armstrong and the CI-128 amendment establish that personhood language cannot override the fundamental right to procreative autonomy.","quote":"the state has a duty to protect innocent life and that duty has grown to a compelling point with respect to partial-birth abortion.","note":"Section 1-2-117 (2023) is of questionable validity after CI-128's passage, which added explicit constitutional protection that supersedes a legislative redefinition.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0020/0500-0200-0010-0020.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-102(e)","pinpoint":"subsection (e)","quote":"the state has a duty to protect innocent life and that duty has grown to a compelling point with respect to partial-birth abortion.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Stated purpose section of the Montana Abortion Control Act"},{"name":"Center for Reproductive Rights (secondary)","href":"https://reproductiverights.org/maps/abortion-laws-by-state/montana","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 1-2-117","quote":"In 2023, the state enacted a law purporting to redefine the right to privacy to exclude the right to abortion.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Secondary source describing § 1-2-117"}]},"contradictions_analysis":"Montana law contains a striking set of internal contradictions on fetal personhood. The same Montana Code Annotated that permits abortion up to viability — and constitutionally protects the right to abortion — also (1) defines deliberate homicide of a fetus as a crime punishable by death or life imprisonment (§ 45-5-102(1)(c)), (2) declares that a 'child conceived but not yet born is to be deemed an existing person' (§ 41-1-103), and (3) states that 'the state has a duty to protect innocent life' (§ 50-20-102(e)). These contradictions are managed — but not resolved — through explicit statutory carve-outs: the fetal homicide law expressly exempts the pregnant woman and anyone performing a consented abortion (§ 45-5-116(1)(a)-(c)). The wrongful-death holding in Strzelczyk treats a stillborn fetus as a 'person' under the civil law, while the Montana Supreme Court in Armstrong and Planned Parenthood repeatedly affirms that the constitutional right to privacy protects the pregnant person's decision to end a pregnancy. The constitutional amendment CI-128 (effective July 1, 2025) deepens the contradiction by providing an express constitutional right to abortion while the legislature's § 1-2-117 attempts to redefine privacy to exclude abortion. These tensions reflect a legislature that has layered fetal-protective language onto a constitutional framework that remains, through both judicial precedent and popular vote, firmly protective of abortion rights. The practical resolution is that personhood language applies in contexts outside of the abortion decision — third-party violence, inheritance, wrongful death — while the constitutional right to abortion controls as to the pregnant person's own decision-making."},"telehealth_and_interstate":{"telehealth_prescribing":{"title":"Telehealth permitted","summary":"Abortion medication can be prescribed via telehealth to patients in Montana, including by out-of-state providers. The telemedicine ban was permanently struck down by the Montana Supreme Court.","description":"You can get abortion medication prescribed through a telemedicine appointment — a video or phone call with a health care provider — without needing to visit a clinic in person. This applies to providers inside Montana and, in practice, to providers in other states who operate under their own state's shield laws. The Montana law that banned telemedicine for abortion and required in-person dispensing of medication was struck down by the Montana Supreme Court. You can receive your medication by mail or pick it up at a pharmacy.","legal_analysis":"The telemedicine ban and in-person dispensing requirements (§§ 50-20-704, 50-20-705) were permanently enjoined in Knudsen, 2025 MT 120. No other statute restricts the use of telehealth for abortion prescribing. Montana law does not explicitly address out-of-state telehealth prescribing into Montana. Providers in shield-law states (e.g., New York, Massachusetts, California, Washington) may prescribe to Montana patients under their own state's protections. Montana itself is not a shield state and has not enacted protections for its providers against out-of-state subpoenas or extradition. The regulatory framework for telehealth generally is governed by Montana's medical practice and pharmacy statutes, which require out-of-state prescribers to comply with Montana licensure requirements unless an exception applies.","note":"Out-of-state telehealth providers should verify compliance with Montana's general telemedicine licensure requirements, which are outside the scope of abortion-specific law. Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication.","verification":"semi_verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"FindLaw","href":"https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/mt-supreme-court/117373154.html","citation":"Planned Parenthood of Mont. v. State by & through Knudsen, 2025 MT 120","quote":"Do restrictions on medication abortions and requirements that providers give patients certain information violate Montana's constitutional guarantees of individual privacy and free speech?","source_type":"case","accessed":"Case summary; telemedicine ban struck down"}]},"out_of_state_travel":{"title":"No restrictions on out-of-state travel","summary":"Montana residents may freely travel out of state for abortion care. No statute restricts or penalizes travel. The proposed abortion-trafficking bill died in the 2025 session.","description":"You can travel from Montana to any other state for abortion care without legal risk. Montana does not have any law that restricts or penalizes crossing state lines for an abortion. A bill that would have made it a crime to transport a minor for an abortion failed to pass in the 2025 legislative session. The Montana Constitution protects anyone who helps someone else exercise their pregnancy decision-making rights.","legal_analysis":"No Montana statute restricts travel for abortion. HB 609 (2025), which would have created the crime of 'abortion trafficking,' died in committee. The constitutional helper-protection clause in Art. II, § 36(3) would provide strong defense even had the bill passed. Montana has not enacted any law attempting to reach conduct occurring in other states (contrast with Texas's SB 8 model or Idaho's 'abortion trafficking' law). The Montana Supreme Court's jurisprudence under Article II, Section 10 strongly supports the right to travel as an aspect of personal autonomy and privacy.","note":"Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication.","verification":"semi_verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"LegiScan","href":"https://legiscan.com/MT/bill/HB609/2025","citation":"HB 609, 2025 Mont. Leg.","quote":"Status: Failed on May 20 2025 - 100% progression","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Bill tracking page"}]},"shield_or_hostile_laws":{"title":"Not a shield state; not hostile either","summary":"Montana has not enacted a shield law protecting providers or patients from out-of-state investigations. It also has not enacted laws targeting cross-border abortion activity. CI-128 protects helpers from in-state government action.","description":"Montana is not one of the states that has passed a 'shield law' — a law that specifically protects abortion providers and patients from investigations, subpoenas, or extradition attempts by other states. Unlike states such as New York, California, and Massachusetts, Montana has not enacted legislation to block cooperation with out-of-state abortion-related prosecutions. However, Montana is also not a state that is trying to reach across its borders to punish abortion activity that happens elsewhere. Montana providers serving Montana residents are protected by the state constitution. The CI-128 amendment says the government cannot penalize anyone for helping someone exercise their pregnancy rights — but this only binds Montana's government, not other states.","legal_analysis":"Montana has not enacted a shield law of the type codified in states like New York (N.Y. Pub. Health Law § 22), Massachusetts, or California. There is no statute prohibiting Montana officials from cooperating with out-of-state subpoenas or extradition requests related to abortion. Conversely, Montana has not enacted any 'hostile' law criminalizing or creating civil liability for out-of-state conduct related to abortion. The state sits in a neutral position on cross-border enforcement — neither affirmatively protecting providers from other states' reach nor affirmatively reaching into other states. The Montana Constitution's helper-protection clause (§ 36(3)) protects against Montana government action but cannot bind other states' officials. The absence of a shield law may create practical vulnerability for Montana providers who serve patients from restrictive neighboring states (Idaho, Wyoming, the Dakotas).","note":"Montana's lack of a shield law is a significant gap. Providers serving out-of-state patients from restrictive states should be aware that Montana law does not affirmatively protect them from other states' legal process. Status set by the research runner: the claim matched search-result snippets, but none of the cited pages were opened in full during research. Confirm the quoted text at the cited URL before publication.","verification":"semi_verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Guttmacher Institute","href":"https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/shield-laws-sexual-and-reproductive-health-care","citation":"Guttmacher Institute, Shield Laws Related to Sexual and Reproductive Health","quote":"All states' shield laws prohibit state entities from complying with out-of-state inquiries related to legally protected health care","source_type":"secondary","accessed":"Montana not listed among shield-law states"}]}},"funding_and_insurance":{"medicaid":{"title":"Broad coverage; restrictions enjoined","summary":"Montana Medicaid covers abortion beyond Hyde minimums. 2023 laws restricting Medicaid abortion coverage were permanently enjoined in March 2025. Historical precedent (Jeannette R.) requires broader coverage.","description":"Montana's Medicaid program covers abortion — not just in the limited cases allowed by federal law (rape, incest, and life endangerment) but more broadly. This is because Montana courts have ruled that the state constitution requires equal treatment of abortion care under Medicaid. In 2023, the legislature passed laws to restrict this coverage, including requiring prior authorization and narrowing the definition of 'medically necessary.' Those laws have been permanently blocked by a state district court. As of mid-2025, Medicaid enrollees in Montana can access abortion coverage without the restrictions the legislature tried to impose.","legal_analysis":"Montana has a long history of court-ordered broader-than-Hyde Medicaid coverage. In Jeannette R. v. Ellery (1995), the Montana District Court held that Montana's Constitution required Medicaid to cover medically necessary abortions. The state has not successfully appealed this principle. In 2023, the legislature enacted HB 544 (Medicaid abortion restrictions — prior authorization, APC exclusion, narrow 'medically necessary' definition) and HB 862 (prohibiting use of public funds for abortion except rape, incest, life endangerment), and DPHHS adopted a parallel rule. The Montana Supreme Court upheld a preliminary injunction against these in Planned Parenthood v. State, 2024 MT 228. On March 11, 2025, the District Court permanently enjoined HB 544, HB 862, and the DPHHS rule. The state has appealed. As of the research date, Medicaid covers abortion without these restrictions. Note: federal developments — including the 2025 federal budget reconciliation law restricting Planned Parenthood's Medicaid reimbursements — may affect access even though state law permits coverage.","note":"The permanent injunction has been appealed. Federal Medicaid defunding of Planned Parenthood under the 2025 reconciliation bill may create practical coverage gaps even if state law remains unchanged.","verification":"verified","confidence":"medium","citations":[{"name":"Center for Reproductive Rights (secondary)","href":"https://reproductiverights.org/maps/abortion-laws-by-state/montana","citation":"Planned Parenthood v. Montana, No. ADV-2023-299, 2025 WL 2835750 (Mont. Dist. Ct. Mar. 11, 2025)","quote":"Planned Parenthood v. Mont., No. ADV-2023-299, 2025 WL 2835750 (Mont. Dist. Ct. Mar. 11, 2025) (permanently enjoining H.B. 544, H.B. 862, and Department of Public Health and Human Services Rule amendments to Mont. Admin. R. 37.82.102 and 37.86.104 which would have restricted Medicaid coverage of abortion)","source_type":"case","accessed":"Secondary source confirming permanent injunction"},{"name":"Center for Reproductive Rights (secondary)","href":"https://reproductiverights.org/maps/abortion-laws-by-state/montana","citation":"Jeannette R. v. Ellery, No. BDV-94-811, 1995 WL 17959705 (Mont. Dist. Ct. May 22, 1995)","quote":"Jeannette R. v. Ellery, No. BDV-94-811, 1995 WL 17959705 (Mont. Dist. Ct. May 22, 1995)","source_type":"case","accessed":"Secondary source; foundational Medicaid coverage case"}]},"private_insurance":{"title":"No mandate; no ban on private coverage","summary":"Montana does not require private insurance plans to cover abortion, but also does not ban them from doing so. There is no requirement for a separate rider.","description":"Montana does not require private health insurance plans to cover abortion, and it also does not prohibit them from covering it. Unlike some states that ban all abortion coverage in private plans or require a separate insurance rider to be purchased, Montana lets insurance companies and employers decide whether to include abortion coverage. The only restriction on private coverage applies to qualified health plans sold on the ACA marketplace (see below).","legal_analysis":"No statute in Title 33 (Insurance) or Title 50, Chapter 20 mandates or bans private insurance coverage of abortion, except for the exchange-plan restriction at § 33-22-116. There is no rider requirement like those in some other states. The absence of a coverage mandate means that whether abortion is covered depends on the individual plan. Employer self-funded plans are governed by ERISA, not state law.","note":"Montana has neither a private insurance coverage mandate nor a ban (other than the exchange-plan restriction). This finding reflects absence of law.","verification":"not_applicable","confidence":"high"},"exchange_plans":{"title":"Exchange plans restricted","summary":"Qualified health plans sold on Montana's ACA marketplace cannot cover abortion except when the mother's life is endangered or the pregnancy results from rape or incest.","description":"If you buy health insurance through Montana's Affordable Care Act marketplace (healthcare.gov), your plan will not cover abortion except in limited circumstances: to save your life due to a physical condition, or if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. This restriction does not apply to plans bought outside the marketplace or to employer-provided insurance.","legal_analysis":"Section 33-22-116(1) provides: 'A qualified health plan, as defined by 42 U.S.C. 18021, may not be offered or otherwise made available through a health insurance exchange established in the state... if the plan provides coverage for abortion as defined in 50-20-104.' Subsection (2) exempts coverage when '(a) the life of the mother is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself; or (b) the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest.' This statute is in effect and was enacted in 2021 (Ch. 352, L. 2021).","quote":"A qualified health plan, as defined by 42 U.S.C. 18021, may not be offered or otherwise made available through a health insurance exchange established in the state pursuant to Public Law 111-148, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, if the plan provides coverage for abortion as defined in 50-20-104.","verification":"verified","confidence":"high","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0330/chapter_0220/part_0010/section_0160/0330-0220-0010-0160.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 33-22-116","pinpoint":"subsection (1)","quote":"A qualified health plan, as defined by 42 U.S.C. 18021, may not be offered or otherwise made available through a health insurance exchange established in the state pursuant to Public Law 111-148, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, if the plan provides coverage for abortion as defined in 50-20-104.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]},"state_funding_of_providers":{"title":"No defunding law in effect","summary":"Montana has no effective law defunding abortion providers. 2023 laws restricting public funding were permanently enjoined. State funds flow to providers for non-abortion and abortion care through Medicaid.","description":"Montana does not have a law that strips funding from organizations that provide abortions, like some other states do. The state tried to restrict public funding of abortion providers in 2023, but those laws were permanently blocked by a court. Planned Parenthood and other providers continue to receive Medicaid reimbursement for the full range of health services they provide, including abortion care.","legal_analysis":"HB 862 (2023), which would have prohibited the use of public funds for abortion services except in cases of rape, incest, or life endangerment, was permanently enjoined in March 2025 (Planned Parenthood v. Montana, No. ADV-2023-299). Thus, there is no effective state defunding law. The state's historical position, as established in Jeannette R., has been to fund abortion through Medicaid. Federal defunding developments under the 2025 budget reconciliation law may affect federal Medicaid reimbursements to Planned Parenthood, but this is a federal action, not a state one.","note":"The permanent injunction on defunding is appealed. Federal developments may moot or complicate the state-law analysis for Medicaid reimbursements.","verification":"verified","confidence":"medium","citations":[{"name":"Center for Reproductive Rights (secondary)","href":"https://reproductiverights.org/maps/abortion-laws-by-state/montana","citation":"Planned Parenthood v. Montana, No. ADV-2023-299, 2025 WL 2835750 (Mont. Dist. Ct. Mar. 11, 2025)","quote":"permanently enjoining H.B. 544, H.B. 862, and Department of Public Health and Human Services Rule amendments","source_type":"case","accessed":"Secondary source confirming permanent injunction"}]}}},"penalties":[{"actor":"Physician (violating viability ban)","offense":"Performing abortion on viable fetus not necessary to preserve life/health of mother","penalty":"Felony: fine up to $1,000, prison up to 5 years, or both (§ 50-20-112(2))","verification":"verified","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0090/0500-0200-0010-0090.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. §§ 50-20-109, 50-20-112(2)","pinpoint":"subsection (2)","quote":"Violation of subsection (1) is a felony.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]},{"actor":"Physician (violating D&X/partial-birth ban)","offense":"Purposely, knowingly, or negligently causing a partial-birth abortion","penalty":"Felony: fine up to $50,000, prison 5-10 years, permanent license revocation (§ 50-20-401(4))","verification":"verified","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/2024/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0040/section_0010/0500-0200-0040-0010.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-401(4)","pinpoint":"subsection (4)","quote":"A person committing the offense provided for in subsection (1) is guilty of a felony and shall be punished by: (a) a fine of not more than $50,000; (b) imprisonment in a correctional facility for a term of not less than 5 years and not more than 10 years; or (c) both fine and imprisonment as provided in subsections (4)(a) and (4)(b); and (d) permanent revocation of the license of the physician performing the partial-birth abortion.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2023 Montana Code Annotated"}]},{"actor":"Provider (documentation/reporting violations)","offense":"Violation of abortion reporting and documentation requirements (§ 50-20-110)","penalty":"Misdemeanor: fine up to $500, jail up to 6 months; plus unprofessional conduct — license suspension up to 1 year","verification":"verified","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0100/0500-0200-0010-0100.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. §§ 50-20-110(7), 50-20-112(3)","pinpoint":"subsection (7)","quote":"Violation of this section is a misdemeanor and is punishable as provided in 46-18-212. Violation of the provisions of subsections (4) or (5)(b) by a health care provider is unprofessional conduct... up to a maximum suspension of the provider's license for a period of 1 year.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]},{"actor":"Provider (parental notice violation)","offense":"Performing abortion on minor under 16 without required 48-hour parental notice","penalty":"Misdemeanor: fine and jail up to 6 months; prima facie evidence of professional violation (§§ 50-20-229, 50-20-232)","verification":"verify_before_publication","citations":[{"name":"Montana DOJ Advisory","href":"https://dojmt.gov/montana-departments-of-justice-public-health-and-human-services-issue-advisory-clarifying-state-of-parental-notification-of-abortion-act","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. §§ 50-20-229, 50-20-232 (Notice Act)","quote":"Persons convicted of performing an abortion in violation of the law face fines of up to $500 and six-months imprisonment.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Montana DOJ advisory"}]},{"actor":"Pregnant woman","offense":"None — expressly exempt from all penalties under abortion chapter","penalty":"No penalty may be imposed (§ 50-20-112(4)(a))","verification":"verified","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0120/0500-0200-0010-0120.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-112(4)(a)","pinpoint":"subsection (4)(a)","quote":"A penalty may not be imposed against the woman upon whom the abortion is performed or attempted to be performed.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]},{"actor":"Third party (fetal homicide — not abortion context)","offense":"Purposely or knowingly causing death of a fetus of another with knowledge of pregnancy","penalty":"Deliberate homicide: death, life imprisonment, or 10-100 years (§ 45-5-102(2))","verification":"verified","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0450/chapter_0050/part_0010/section_0020/0450-0050-0010-0020.html","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 45-5-102(1)(c), (2)","pinpoint":"subsections (1)(c) and (2)","quote":"A person commits the offense of deliberate homicide if: ... the person purposely or knowingly causes the death of a fetus of another with knowledge that the woman is pregnant. A person convicted of the offense of deliberate homicide shall be punished by death... by life imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison for a term of not less than 10 years or more than 100 years.","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Text as displayed in the 2025 Montana Code Annotated"}]}],"recent_changes":[{"date":"2022-06-24","event":"Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decided by U.S. Supreme Court, overturning Roe v. Wade. Montana's abortion protections remain intact under state constitutional law (Armstrong).","citations":[{"name":"U.S. Supreme Court","href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf","citation":"Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Org., 597 U.S. 215 (2022)","source_type":"case"}]},{"date":"2023-05-12","event":"Montana Supreme Court in Weems v. State permanently enjoins physician-only abortion law, holding APRNs may provide abortion care consistent with their scope of practice.","citations":[{"name":"Montana Free Press","href":"https://montanafreepress.org/2023/05/12/montana-supreme-court-upholds-ruling-that-allows-some-nurses-to-provide-abortions","citation":"Weems v. State, 2023 MT 82, 412 Mont. 132, 529 P.3d 798","source_type":"case"}]},{"date":"2023-05-16","event":"Governor Gianforte signs HB 544, HB 862, HB 937, and HB 721 (D&E ban). All are challenged and preliminarily enjoined within weeks."},{"date":"2024-08-14","event":"Montana Supreme Court strikes down Parental Consent for Abortion Act (2013) as violating minors' privacy and equal protection rights under the Montana Constitution in Planned Parenthood v. State, 2024 MT 178.","citations":[{"name":"Justia","href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/montana/supreme-court/2024/da-23-0272-0.html","citation":"Planned Parenthood v. State, 2024 MT 178","source_type":"case"}]},{"date":"2024-10-09","event":"Montana Supreme Court affirms preliminary injunction against Medicaid abortion restrictions (HB 544, HB 862, DPHHS rule) in Planned Parenthood v. State, 2024 MT 228.","citations":[{"name":"Justia","href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/montana/supreme-court/2024/da-23-0287.html","citation":"Planned Parenthood v. State, 2024 MT 228","source_type":"case"}]},{"date":"2024-11-05","event":"Montana voters approve CI-128, the Right to Abortion Initiative, amending the Montana Constitution to explicitly protect the right to make and carry out decisions about pregnancy, including the right to abortion. Passes with approximately 57% support.","citations":[{"name":"Ballotpedia","href":"https://ballotpedia.org/Montana_CI-128,_Right_to_Abortion_Initiative_(2024)","citation":"CI-128, 2024 Ballot Initiative","source_type":"ballot_measure"}]},{"date":"2025-03-10","event":"Montana District Court permanently enjoins D&E ban (§ 50-20-1003) and direct-to-patient telehealth medication abortion restrictions, ruling both violate the Montana Constitution.","citations":[{"name":"Planned Parenthood (press release)","href":"https://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/newsroom/press-releases/in-win-for-montanans-district-court-strikes-down-two-abortion-bans","citation":"Planned Parenthood of Mont. v. Montana, No. ADV-25-2023-0000231, 2025 WL 2846216 (Mont. Dist. Mar. 7, 2025)","source_type":"case"}]},{"date":"2025-03-11","event":"Montana District Court permanently enjoins HB 544, HB 862, and DPHHS rule restricting Medicaid coverage of abortion.","citations":[{"name":"Center for Reproductive Rights","href":"https://reproductiverights.org/maps/abortion-laws-by-state/montana","citation":"Planned Parenthood v. Montana, No. ADV-2023-299, 2025 WL 2835750 (Mont. Dist. Ct. Mar. 11, 2025)","source_type":"case"}]},{"date":"2025-06-09","event":"Montana Supreme Court in Knudsen (2025 MT 120) affirms permanent injunction of 20-week abortion ban, telemedicine ban, 24-hour waiting period, biased counseling mandate, and ultrasound requirement, holding all violate Montana's constitutional right to privacy.","citations":[{"name":"FindLaw","href":"https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/mt-supreme-court/117373154.html","citation":"Planned Parenthood of Mont. v. State by & through Knudsen, 2025 MT 120, 570 P.3d 51","source_type":"case"}]},{"date":"2025-07-01","event":"CI-128 takes effect, adding Article II, Section 36 to the Montana Constitution — the explicit right to make and carry out decisions about one's own pregnancy, including the right to abortion, and protection for helpers.","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0000/article_0020/part_0010/section_0360/0000-0020-0010-0360.html","citation":"Mont. Const. art. II, § 36","source_type":"constitution"}]},{"date":"2025-07-03","event":"U.S. Supreme Court denies certiorari in Montana v. Planned Parenthood of Montana, leaving in place the Montana Supreme Court's decision striking down the parental consent law.","citations":[{"name":"U.S. Supreme Court","href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-745_7758.pdf","citation":"Montana v. Planned Parenthood of Mont., 145 S. Ct. 2627 (2025)","source_type":"case"}]}],"pending_changes":[{"name":"Planned Parenthood v. State (Medicaid restrictions appeal)","type":"litigation","status":"State's appeal of permanent injunction against HB 544, HB 862, and DPHHS rule pending before Montana Supreme Court","effect":"If reversed, Montana Medicaid would no longer cover abortion beyond Hyde minimums (life, rape, incest), would require prior authorization, and would exclude APCs from performing Medicaid-reimbursed abortions.","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature Litigation Update","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/content/Committees/Interim/2025-2026/Legislative-Council/October_28-29_2025/2.2_Oct_2025_Litigation_update_for_Leg_Council.pdf","citation":"Planned Parenthood v. Montana, No. ADV-2023-299 (Mont. Dist. Ct., appealed)","source_type":"case","accessed":"Litigation update confirms appeal pending"}]},{"name":"All Families Healthcare v. Montana (HB 937 clinic licensure appeal)","type":"litigation","status":"State's appeal of preliminary injunction against abortion clinic licensure law pending; Montana Supreme Court affirmed preliminary injunction, merits remain at district court","effect":"If HB 937 takes effect, abortion clinics providing medication abortion to 5+ patients annually or performing any procedural abortion would need a special state license and comply with facility requirements modeled on ambulatory surgical centers.","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature / CourtHouse News","href":"https://courthousenews.com/montana-supreme-court-keeps-abortion-clinic-restrictions-on-ice","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. §§ 50-20-901 et seq. (HB 937, 2023)","source_type":"statute"}]},{"name":"Challenge to Parental Notice of Abortion Act (LR-120)","type":"litigation","status":"Constitutional challenge pending in Montana district court; state seeks dismissal","effect":"If the Notice Act is struck down, no parental involvement would be required for minors seeking abortion in Montana. If upheld, the 48-hour notice requirement for minors under 16 remains.","citations":[{"name":"Daily Montanan","href":"https://dailymontanan.com/2026/01/16/state-seeks-dismissal-of-lawsuit-over-parental-notification","citation":"Daily Montanan, State seeks dismissal of lawsuit over parental notification (Jan. 16, 2026)","source_type":"secondary"}]},{"name":"State appeal of D&E ban permanent injunction","type":"litigation","status":"State's appeal of permanent injunction against D&E ban (§ 50-20-1003) pending before Montana Supreme Court, fully briefed and submitted","effect":"If reversed, D&E — the most common second-trimester abortion method — would be criminalized as a felony with fines up to $50,000, 5-10 years prison, and license suspension.","citations":[{"name":"Montana Legislature Litigation Update","href":"https://archive.legmt.gov/content/Committees/Interim/2025-2026/Legislative-Council/October_28-29_2025/2.2_Oct_2025_Litigation_update_for_Leg_Council.pdf","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-1003 (enjoined)","source_type":"statute","accessed":"Litigation update confirms fully briefed and submitted to Montana Supreme Court"}]},{"name":"Potential legislative response to CI-128","type":"legislation","status":"2025 session saw relatively few abortion bills pass; HB 609 (abortion trafficking) died. Future sessions may see renewed attempts at restrictions framed as 'regulation' permitted under CI-128's post-viability language.","effect":"The legislature may attempt to enact post-viability regulations or provider regulations that survive the 'compelling state interest' standard under CI-128, but the constitutional amendment makes outright pre-viability bans or burdens extremely difficult to sustain.","citations":[{"name":"Montana Free Press","href":"https://montanafreepress.org/2025/03/14/republican-lawmakers-struggle-to-find-footing-after-passage-of-abortion-rights-amendment","citation":"Montana Free Press, Republican lawmakers struggle to find footing after passage of abortion rights amendment (Mar. 14, 2025)","source_type":"secondary"}]}],"key_authorities":[{"name":"Montana Constitution, Article II, Section 36 (CI-128)","citation":"Mont. Const. art. II, § 36","type":"constitution","url":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0000/article_0020/part_0010/section_0360/0000-0020-0010-0360.html","why":"Explicit state constitutional right to abortion, effective July 1, 2025; protects pre-viability abortion access, post-viability health/life exceptions, and helpers."},{"name":"Montana Constitution, Article II, Section 10","citation":"Mont. Const. art. II, § 10","type":"constitution","url":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0000/article_0020/part_0010/section_0100/0000-0020-0010-0100.html","why":"The foundational privacy provision interpreted in Armstrong to protect procreative autonomy; continues to provide independent protection alongside CI-128."},{"name":"Armstrong v. State (1999)","citation":"Armstrong v. State, 1999 MT 261, 296 Mont. 361, 989 P.2d 364","type":"case","url":"https://reproductiverights.org/maps/abortion-laws-by-state/montana","why":"Established that Montana's constitutional right to privacy protects procreative autonomy including abortion, requiring strict scrutiny for all restrictions."},{"name":"Planned Parenthood v. State (Knudsen) (2025)","citation":"Planned Parenthood of Mont. v. State by & through Knudsen, 2025 MT 120, 570 P.3d 51","type":"case","url":"https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/mt-supreme-court/117373154.html","why":"Sweeping 2025 decision permanently striking down 20-week ban, telemedicine ban, waiting period, counseling mandate, and ultrasound requirement."},{"name":"Planned Parenthood v. State (parental consent) (2024)","citation":"Planned Parenthood v. State, 2024 MT 178, cert. denied, 145 S. Ct. 2627 (2025)","type":"case","url":"https://law.justia.com/cases/montana/supreme-court/2024/da-23-0272-0.html","why":"Struck down parental consent requirement as violating minors' privacy and equal protection rights; U.S. Supreme Court denied review."},{"name":"Weems v. State (2023)","citation":"Weems v. State, 2023 MT 82, 412 Mont. 132, 529 P.3d 798","type":"case","url":"https://montanafreepress.org/2023/05/12/montana-supreme-court-upholds-ruling-that-allows-some-nurses-to-provide-abortions","why":"Permanently enjoined physician-only restriction; APRNs may provide abortion care consistent with their scope of practice."},{"name":"Montana Abortion Control Act — Viability Ban","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-109","type":"statute","url":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0090/0500-0200-0010-0090.html","why":"The operative statutory ban: prohibits abortion after viability unless to preserve life/health, defines who may perform abortions."},{"name":"Montana Abortion Control Act — Penalties & Woman Exemption","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-112","type":"statute","url":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0120/0500-0200-0010-0120.html","why":"Establishes all penalties under the abortion chapter and contains the express exemption of the pregnant woman from all penalties."},{"name":"Partial-Birth Abortion Ban","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-401","type":"statute","url":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/2024/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0040/section_0010/0500-0200-0040-0010.html","why":"The only method-specific ban currently in effect; criminalizes intact D&X with life exception."},{"name":"Fetal Homicide and Exemptions","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. §§ 45-5-102(1)(c), 45-5-116","type":"statute","url":"https://law.justia.com/codes/montana/title-45/chapter-5/part-1/section-45-5-116","why":"Defines deliberate homicide of a fetus while expressly exempting abortion, medical treatment, and the pregnant woman."},{"name":"Qualified Health Plan Abortion Coverage Restriction","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 33-22-116","type":"statute","url":"https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0330/chapter_0220/part_0010/section_0160/0330-0220-0010-0160.html","why":"Restricts ACA exchange plan coverage of abortion to cases of life endangerment, rape, or incest."},{"name":"Strzelczyk v. Jett (1994)","citation":"Strzelczyk v. Jett, No. 93-173 (Mont. 1994)","type":"case","url":"https://law.justia.com/cases/montana/supreme-court/1994/59ddbbe3-5ef3-47e7-a857-dd37305e4248.html","why":"Recognized wrongful-death claim for stillborn fetus under Montana civil law, while expressly distinguishing abortion."},{"name":"LR-120, Parental Notification of Abortion Act (2012)","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. §§ 50-20-221 to -235","type":"ballot_measure","url":"https://dojmt.gov/montana-departments-of-justice-public-health-and-human-services-issue-advisory-clarifying-state-of-parental-notification-of-abortion-act","why":"Voter-enacted law requiring 48-hour parental notice before abortion for minors under 16; the only parental-involvement law currently in effect."},{"name":"Planned Parenthood v. State (Medicaid) (2024)","citation":"Planned Parenthood v. State, 2024 MT 228, 418 Mont. 253, 557 P.3d 440","type":"case","url":"https://law.justia.com/cases/montana/supreme-court/2024/da-23-0287.html","why":"Upheld preliminary injunction against Medicaid abortion restrictions, affirming that limiting coverage likely violates the Montana Constitution."},{"name":"Abortion Reporting Requirements","citation":"Mont. Code Ann. § 50-20-110","type":"statute","url":"https://mca.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0500/chapter_0200/part_0010/section_0100/0500-0200-0010-0100.html","why":"Requires facilities and providers to document and report each abortion; violation is a misdemeanor."}],"research_notes":{"overall_confidence":"high","editor_notes":"Before publication: (1) Verify the current appellate status of the permanent injunction in Planned Parenthood v. Montana (ADV-2023-299) from the Montana Supreme Court docket. (2) Verify whether the state's appeal of the D&E ban permanent injunction has been decided. (3) Confirm the status of the district court challenge to the Parental Notice Act (LR-120). (4) Check whether any 2026 ballot measures affecting CI-128 have qualified. (5) The Montana Code Annotated online version disclaims that the printed version prevails; cross-check key statutes against the latest print or official online edition. (6) Federal Medicaid defunding developments may alter the practical funding landscape independently of state law.","gaps":["Specific text of the Parental Notice Act (LR-120) provisions as currently codified in the MCA is difficult to isolate due to the complex repeal-and-revival history; the Montana DOJ advisory confirms the operative sections but a direct statutory read of each section from the official code would improve certainty.","Whether Montana's wrongful-death holding in Strzelczyk extends to pre-viability stillbirths — the case involved a full-term stillbirth and the court emphasized its fact-specific nature.","The exact procedural posture of the appeal of the permanent injunction in the Medicaid funding case (Planned Parenthood v. Montana, No. ADV-2023-299) — confirmed as appealed but exact docket status not verified from a court docket.","Potential interaction between CI-128's health exception and the dual-physician certification requirement for post-viability health-based abortions — not yet litigated.","The effect of the 2025 federal budget reconciliation law's restrictions on Medicaid reimbursement to Planned Parenthood on Montana Medicaid enrollees' access to abortion.","Whether § 1-2-117 (2023 legislative redefinition of privacy to exclude abortion) has any legal effect after CI-128's constitutional amendment — almost certainly it does not, but no court has formally struck it down."]}}